Review Article

The Expanding Spectrum of Ixodes Tick-Borne Diseases: Insights, Challenges, and Innovations

Nune Azaryan Dermenjian¹, Vianka Vanessa Yanez Montalvo², Melanie Dayana Yanez Montalvo³, Valeria Di Stefano Perez⁴, Jubran Al Balushi⁵, Yohana Haddish Mogos⁶, Juan C Pantoja⁷, Yolanda Maria Fernandez Muñoz⁸, Chinyere Pamugo⁹, Karim Al Harakeh¹⁰, Seelamonthula Vaibhav Sai¹¹, Fredy Reynaldo Pavón Enamorado⁸ and Maria Isabel Gomez Coral¹²

¹Yerevan State Medical University, Armenia/USA

²Universidad de Guayaquil, Ecuador

³Facultad de Ciencias Médicas, Universidad de Guayaquil, Ecuador

³Universidad de Ciencias Medicas de Centro America (UCIMED), San José, Costa Rica

³University College Dublin, Ireland

³Orotta School of Medicine, Canada

³Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla, Colombia

³Universidad Católica de Honduras, Honduras

³University of Texas Houston, Health Sciences Center, USA

³American University of Antigua, United States of America

³Kamineni Institute of Medical Sciences, India

³Universidad del Valle de México, México

Submission: June 01, 2024; Published: June 06, 2024

*Corresponding author: Maria Isabel Gomez Coral, Universidad del Valle de México, México

How to cite this article: Nune Azaryan Dermenjian, Vianka Vanessa Yanez Montalvo, Melanie Dayana Yanez Montalvo, Valeria Di Stefano Perez, Jubran Al Balushi, Yohana Haddish Mogos, et al. The Expanding Spectrum of Ixodes Tick-Borne Diseases: Insights, Challenges, and Innovations. Ann Rev Resear. 2024; 11(2): 555808. DOI: 10.19080/ARR.2024.11.555808

Abstract

The global burden of Ixodes tick-borne diseases, including Lyme disease, babesiosis, and anaplasmosis, is escalating due to the geographical expansion of tick vectors, particularly Ixodes scapularis and Amblyomma Americanum, in the USA. This expansion has led to increased cases of Lyme disease and human ehrlichiosis, with a similar rise noted in Europe and Asia for diseases like tick-borne encephalitis and hemorrhagic fever. The review highlights the widespread distribution of tick-borne pathogens and the urgent need for improved diagnostic methods and heightened awareness. Lyme disease, caused by Borrelia burgdorferi, is predominantly transmitted by black-legged ticks and presents in three stages, each with distinct clinical manifestations. Diagnosis involves serological testing, which has limitations, while treatment primarily includes antibiotics like doxycycline. Babesiosis, caused by Babesia species, often results from Ixodes scapularis bites, with clinical severity varying based on host immunocompetence. Diagnosis requires laboratory testing, and treatment typically involves atovaquone and azithromycin. Anaplasmosis, caused by Anaplasma phagocytophilum, is transmitted by several Ixodes species and presents with nonspecific symptoms. Diagnosis relies on serological and molecular methods, with doxycycline as the first-line treatment. The review underscores the complexity of Ixodes tick-borne diseases and the necessity for integrated approaches involving researchers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers to manage and control these infections effectively.

Keywords: Ixodes Tick Diseases; Lyme Disease; Babesiosis; Anaplasmosis, Borrelia Burgdorferi; Tick-Borne Diseases; Zoonotic Infections; Vector-borne Diseases

Abbreviations: LD: Lyme Disease; BB: Borrelia burgdorferi; BMD: Babesia microti disease; AD: Anaplasma disease; TBE: Tick-borne encephalitis; HF: Hemorrhagic fever; EM: Erythema migrans; PCR: Polymerase Chain Reaction; ELISA: Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay; WB: Western Blot; IgM: Immunoglobulin M; IgG: Immunoglobulin G; PTLDS: Post-Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome; FDA: Food and Drug Administration; GPI: Glycosylphosphatidylinositol; DIC: Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation

Introduction

The global burden of Ixodes tick-borne diseases, including Lyme disease, babesiosis, and anaplasmosis, is increasing due to the geographical expansion of tick vectors. Due to this expansion in the Northern Hemisphere, vectors such as Ixodes scapularis and Amblyomma Americanum have recently become common in the USA. They are responsible for increased cases of Lyme disease and human erlichiosis. The rise of tick-borne diseases is also noted in Europe and Asia, with increased cases of tick-borne encephalitis and hemorrhagic fever [1]. Reye et al. discussed an increased burden of tick-borne pathogens in Ixodes Ricinus and Dermacentor Reticulatus ticks in Belarus, posing a risk to humans and animals [2]. The distribution of pathogens associated with well-described tick-borne zoonoses seems wider than previously thought. Telford et al. highlight the renewed interest in tick-borne infections and the recognition of diverse new emergent infections arising from increased interest in Lyme disease in recent decades [3]. Fang et al. identified 33 emerging tick-borne agents in mainland China, with 15 causing human disease in their study [4]. The blacklegged tick named Ixodes scapularis is spreading rapidly, carrying multiple pathogens that cause various diseases. The geographic range of Ixodes scapularis has expanded, the number of counties with established populations has doubled, and the incidence of reported cases of Ixodes scapularis-borne diseases has increased significantly [7]. The literature emphasizes the need for improved diagnostic methods and increased awareness of these infections [4,7].

Understanding the spectrum of diseases transmitted by Ixodes ticks is a fundamental step toward effectively preventing and controlling these zoonotic infections. The literature highlights that at least six tick-borne zoonoses are transmitted by the Ixodes ricinus species complex. Therefore, understanding the biology of these ticks is not just important, but essential for the prevention and control of the zoonoses they transmit [5]. Grey et al. aimed to clarify the role of diapause in the life cycle of four related Ixodes ticks: Ixodes pacificus, Ixodes persulcatus, Ixodes ricinus, and Ixodes scapularis and its impact on their biology and the transmission of pathogens. The study concluded that the role of diapause in the life cycles of medically important ticks is not fully understood. The diapause is a key factor in determining the seasonal activity of ticks, and its understanding can lead to better prevention strategies [5,6].

This review aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the wide spectrum of Ixodes tick-borne diseases. It underscores the increasing prevalence and diversity of tick-borne diseases, the role of Ixodes ticks as vectors, and the challenges in prevention and control. Importantly, the review emphasizes the need for a more integrated approach. Given the complex interactions between ticks, pathogens, and their environments, a comprehensive understanding and management of these diseases require a collaborative effort from researchers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers in the field of infectious diseases and public health.

Lyme Disease

Epidemiology and Geographic Distribution

Reported Lyme disease cases in the US are concentrated mainly in endemic regions, including the West Coast, upper Midwest, mid-Atlantic, and Northeast. Most cases are reported in east-central Pennsylvania and the northern New Jersey coast. However, ticks are spreading Lyme disease and continuously expanding their geographic range. Lyme disease has been observed to be expanding into both the northern side, like Canada, and the southern side, like Tennessee and North Carolina [8]. Lyme disease is highly prevalent in the US. According to recent research, almost 4,760,000 Americans are treated and diagnosed with Lyme disease annually [9]. This number involves patients generally treated based on clinical suspicion of Lyme disease [8,9].

Lyme disease is not just a random occurrence; it is mainly caused by bacteria known as B. burgdorferi. This bacterium can be carried by black-legged ticks, also known as deer ticks [10]. Furthermore, not every species of tick can carry such bacteria. Immature deer ticks, also known as nymphs, are the most significant vectors of this disease. The risk of contracting Lyme disease is not limited to a specific group, it can affect anyone who is bitten by an infected tick. Outdoor activities such as hiking, hunting, and gardening in regions where deer ticks live can significantly enhance exposure to these ticks, potentially leading to the emergence and spread of the disease [10]. Additionally, walking into high grasses in highly prevalent areas of Lyme disease can also increase the risk of its spread and emergence, highlighting the need for caution and preventive measures.

Lyme disease is reported occasionally in travelers to the US returning to their home nations. Some cases have also been reported in the US and in Australian travelers returning from endemic regions of Europe. This disease is endemic in Europe, from the northern Mediterranean nations of Spain, Italy, and Greece to southern Scandinavia. Incidence is highest in eastern and central European nations. Moreover, infected deer ticks in Asia range from Japan, China, and Mongolia to western Russia. Furthermore, some of the highly endemic regions in North America include North- Central and Northeastern US [8,9].

Pathogenesis and Clinical Manifestations

Hard-shelled ticks of the Ixodes genus contribute to the most critical vector of Lyme disease transmission. Although ticks are born uninfected, larvae acquire spirochetes by feeding on infected reservoirs, including rodents such as field mice, birds, and whitetailed deer [11,12]. As they grow into nymphal and adult stages, they transmit spirochetes to reservoirs or other hosts, such as humans. Immature ticks are responsible for most transmission rates in humans [11,12].

Lyme disease is classified into three stages of clinical presentation.

Stage 1, or early localized disease, presents the most pathognomonic sign: a circular-oval red rash with central clearing in a “bulls-eye” configuration called erythema migrans [11,12]. It is the origin site of the tick bite and inoculation of bacteria. Although not always accounted for, it is found in up to 70-80% of cases and measures 5 centimeters in diameter or more prominent [13]. Usually, erythema migrans emerge after 5 to 7 and up to 14 days after the separation of the tick and sometimes may be reported for up to three months [11-13]. Other manifestations may be related to flu-like symptoms, such as low-grade fever, chills, headaches, fatigue, and general malaise [11,13].

Stage 2 or early disseminated disease begins after 12 weeks of the original tick bite and may lead to neurological, cardiac, and rheumatologic symptoms. Some include cranial neuropathy presenting as diplopia, facial nerve palsy or Bell palsy, and lymphocytic meningitis. The most common cardiac involvement to be reported is an atrioventricular heart block proximal to the bundle of His [11]. Lyme arthritis is usually mono-articular or oligoarticular, and though not exclusive, it generally affects large joints, commonly the knees, ankles, and wrists [12,13]. Patients present with large effusions and swelling but are not limiting pain or mobility when related to knee involvement. Although rare, Borrelial lymphocytoma is a dermatological manifestation that presents as a nodular red-blue painful swelling in the ear, scrotum, or the areola of the breast [12,13].

Stage 3 or late disseminated/persistent/chronic disease results from untreated Lyme disease after several months or years of the original tick bite [13]. It is characterized by manifestations such as encephalomyelitis, with symptoms such as ataxia, seizures, and autonomic dysfunction. Chronic arthritis with usual knee joint involvement and/or peripheral polyneuropathy are also features of the late disseminated stage [11,12]. Cognitive deficits and psychiatric manifestations are also described in this stage of the disease [13].

Diagnostic and Treatment Approaches

Overall, there are two diagnostic tests for Lyme borreliosis. Direct detection methods identify Lyme borreliosis antigens or components in patient specimens. In contrast, indirect detection methods detect a host response to the infection and are also known as serum antibody tests [14]. Regardless of recent advances in molecular methods for the direct detection of infectious agents, such as PCR and culture, direct detection methods only play a significant role in diagnosing Lyme borreliosis if used in research settings. Indirect detection methods are, therefore, the most useful and commonly utilized diagnostic aids. The diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis based on serology uses two tests: an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and a Western Blot (WB). After initial infection with B. Burgdorferi, antibodies may not be detectable for several days to a few weeks during the “window period.” The antibody response is initially marked by the appearance of IgM-class antibodies, often with rapid IgM-to- IgG isotype switching. These antibodies detect surface-exposed antigens, outer membrane lipoproteins, and the 41-kDa flagellar protein (p41/flagellin/FlaB) [15-27]. Other immunogenic antigens are also targeted in serological tests. A robust IgG antibody response usually develops after 1 to 2 months of untreated active infection. The most robust IgG antibody response was found in Lyme arthritis patients in the United States, with reactivity with as many as 89 antigens, particularly outer surface proteins [28]. While the IgM antibody response usually wanes and may become undetectable in late-active disease, the IgG antibody response persists [28-31]. There may be cases, however, where IgM antibodies continue to be detected [28,30]. Therefore, specific IgM antibodies do not necessarily indicate active or recent infection or reinfection unless the appropriate clinical presentation is present.

Even though they are widely used, these techniques have many limitations [32]. Lyme borreliosis can escape the immune system using a variety of mechanisms, thereby resulting in reduced immune protection despite the activation of innate and adaptive immunity [33]. A further obstacle to early detection is that serodetection lacks sensitivity in the early stage of the disease because of the so-called “window period,” where insufficient time has lapsed between infection and serotesting [15-17]. Wormser et al. demonstrated in one study that conventional two-tiered testing (EIA and Western blot) showed only 14% sensitivity in patients with solitary EM lesions evaluated within one week of rash onset, compared to 86% sensitivity in patients with localized infection evaluated 22 to 30 days after symptom onset, indicating that the robustness of the antibody response with the progression of time affects the sensitivity of the tests [33]. Additionally, antibiotic treatment may limit the development of a strong antibody response. Furthermore, there is possible cross-reactivity of antibodies due to common antigens with other diseases such as Epstein-Barr Virus and Toxoplasma gondii, and also the existence of co-infection, implying serum antibody tests might lack specificity leading to false positive or false negative results. Lastly, serological tests cannot distinguish between a past but cleared infection and an active one [34-36].

Lyme disease symptoms vary by stage—early localized, early disseminated, and late disseminated. The pathognomonic symptom, erythema migrans (EM), appears in the first stage at the tick bite site but is not always detected. Later stages can present non-specific symptoms such as neuroborreliosis, carditis, or arthritis, complicating diagnosis [37,38]. Lyme disease treatment involves simple antibiotic therapy, resolving 80 to 90% of cases if detected early. According to CDC guidelines, erythema migrans are treated with doxycycline 100 mg twice daily for 10-14 days, amoxicillin 500 mg thrice daily for 14 days, or cefuroxime 500 mg twice daily for 14 days [39,40]. These guidelines are supported by studies showing high efficacy with these treatments. For instance, a study with 607 patients treated with doxycycline found treatment failure in less than 1%, with most cases suggesting reinfection [41]. Despite doxycycline’s effectiveness, it has rare potential adverse effects, including photosensitivity, pseudotumor cerebri, and esophageal perforation [42]. One study compared the effectiveness of cefuroxime as an alternative to doxycycline as a treatment option for children with erythema migrans. This study found total resolution of symptoms in 92% and 67% of groups treated with cefuroxime and doxycycline, respectively [43]. Cefuroxime can, therefore, be used in patients with EM and is a viable alternative, especially for children, in whom side effects of doxycycline might be of concern. Confirmation of successful antibiotic treatment can be tricky because B. burgdorferi-specific IgM and IgG antibody responses may persist qualitatively after effective antimicrobial treatment. Thus, serologic testing cannot be reliably used to distinguish between active and past infection unless seroreversion or a ≥4-fold decline in IgG antibody titer can be demonstrated by analyzing multiple serum samples [43].

A significant proportion of patients with Lyme arthritis do not respond fully to a 28-day course of antibiotics, necessitating retreatment. B. burgdorferi evades immune attack through antigenic variation and reduced antigen exposure, resembling other chronic infections where persister cells enable survival despite antibiotic treatment [44-49]. The presence of different genotypes within Borrelia species has significant clinical and diagnostic implications. Exposure to one genotype does not guarantee immunity against others [50]. Consequently, individuals can experience multiple infections from various B. burgdorferi genotypes. Reinfection is possible after an antibiotic-treated episode of erythema migrans. In contrast, reinfection is rarely reported following the resolution of late-stage Lyme borreliosis, likely due to the broader protective immune response elicited during the later stages of the disease [50-53].

Another concerning aspect of Lyme disease is post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome (PTLDS), characterized by persistent symptoms after treatment. The pathogenesis of PTLDS remains unclear, with theories including immune response to residual bacteria, autoimmunity, cross-reactivity, molecular mimicry, coinfections/ co-transmission, borrelial tolerance to antibiotics, and central sensitization. Direct detection methods can have a role in this case by allowing the detection of Borrelia bacteria and helping to determine if the antibiotics-based therapy has to be prolonged. Although there is no definitive standard of treatment for PTLDS, current management is supportive, highlighting the need for more research [38,50-53].

Babesiosis

Epidemiology and Geographic Distribution

Babesiosis is a tickborne (mainly) infection caused by the parasite of the genus Babesia; few species have been documented that can affect humans (B. microti, B. divergens, B. duncani, and B. venatorum, B. motasi, and Babesia crassa-like agent), being B. microti the most common cause [54,55]. It is transmitted from the bite of the blacklegged tick (Ixoides scapularis), widely distributed in the northeast, upper Midwest, mid-Atlantic, and southeast states of the United States and Canada [56-58]. It can also occur from a blood transfusion, organ transplant, or congenitally [56]. In the US, babesiosis is considered endemic in 7 states: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin [59]. The emergence of the disease in the northeastern areas is suspected to be related to human migration to wooded areas and the increased population of white-tailed deer nearby [60]. On the other hand, there is a higher incidence among travelers going to endemic areas where symptoms may be absent or subtle [61].

Pathogenesis and Clinical Manifestations

B. microti is primarily transmitted to people by I. scapularis. Progression of I. scapularis through each of the three stages of its life cycle (larva, nymph, and adult) requires a blood meal from a vertebrate host. The primary reservoir host for B. microti is the white-footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus). Most cases result from exposure to nymphal ticks from late spring through summer. A few babesia species are transmitted through transfusion of blood or blood products. B. microti is the most common transfusion-transmitted pathogen reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) [62]. The pathogenesis of babesiosis is closely linked to the host response to infection and parasite-induced modifications in the erythrocyte membrane. The disease results from the excessive production of proinflammatory cytokines. Proinflammatory cytokines may be released by contact with immune cells with the glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI) anchors of babesia proteins expressed at the parasite’s surface or the surface of infected red blood cells. Proinflammatory cytokines subsequently stimulate downstream mediators such as nitric oxide, which may kill parasites, but also cause cellular damage when produced in excess [63]. Intravascular sequestration of leukocytes and infected erythrocytes may lead to obstruction of the microvasculature and tissue hypoxia. Anemia caused by the rupture of erythrocytes during the egress of babesia also contributes to pathogenesis, as do nonhemolytic mechanisms, such as the clearance of uninfected erythrocytes [62].

The clinical presentation of babesiosis can range from asymptomatic to severe infection, causing multi-organ failure. The severity of infection is often dependent on the immunocompetence of the host. The asymptomatic infection has been reported in up to 20% of adults and 50% of children. The incubation period is 1–4 weeks following tick bite and 1–9 weeks after contaminated blood transfusion [64]. Symptomatic illness in patients without immunodeficiencies usually consists of a febrile, flu-like illness, often with a chill, sweats, malaise, fatigue, and headache. Other less common symptoms include a cough, arthralgia, sore throat, abdominal pain, nausea, emotional lability, and depression. A rash is not a common symptom and may indicate co-infection with Lyme disease [65]. Severe B. microti illness requiring hospital admission is common among patients who have undergone splenectomy and those with cancer, human immunodeficiency virus infection, hemoglobinopathy, or chronic heart, lung, or liver disease. Other groups at increased risk for severe disease include neonates, persons over the age of 50 years, patients receiving treatment with immunosuppressive drugs for cancer (e.g., rituximab) or undergoing organ transplantation, and those receiving anti-cytokine therapy [62]. Complications include adult respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary edema, disseminated intravascular coagulation, congestive heart failure, renal failure, coma, splenic rupture, or a prolonged relapsing course of illness despite standard antibiotic therapy [66]. Death occurs in up to a tenth of patients hospitalized for B. microti infection. The fatality rate is even higher among those who are immunocompromised or acquired the infection through blood transfusion. Concurrent infection with B. microti and one or several tick-transmitted pathogens can occur and may increase the number and duration of acute symptoms [63].

Diagnostic and Treatment Approaches

When diagnosing babesiosis, it is important to suspect patients who are travelers, especially in the summer, and more specifically but not exclusively, those who visited endemic areas. It may also present as Lyme disease refractory to antibiotics [67]. However, laboratory testing is necessary to diagnose babesiosis due to various presenting signs and symptoms. A complete blood count would be investigated in most patients with infection-like symptoms. In patients with babesiosis, anemia and thrombocytopenia are common findings, and Leukocyte count may be decreased [68].

Furthermore, the parasite can be visualized on a Giemsa stain of peripheral blood smear using a microscope as they are intraerythrocytic. There are many forms that the parasite may take, but the most common form is the ring form. Ordinarily, only 10% of erythrocytes would be infected, but this number can increase to 85% in asplenic patients [69]. In addition, laboratory findings directly resulting from the parasite’s pathogenic actions, erythrocyte invasion, and lysis will be observed. Therefore, reticulocyte count, liver enzyme concentrations, and unconjugated bilirubin will be elevated. If the disease progresses and begins to affect the kidneys, proteinuria and elevated blood urea nitrogen and creatinine will be observed [68]. If the blood smear is negative, other tests include polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and convalescent serology [70]. PCR is as sensitive as microscopic detection on blood smears but is also more specific. Immunofluorescent antibody and complement-fixation assays can also detect antibacterial antibodies [71]. It is more reliable than PCR and takes less time and money to conduct this investigation.

In the past, standard treatment changed over time as safer treatment options were discovered, which resulted in less severe adverse reactions. In the 1980s, a combination of Clindamycin and Quinine was used, but it caused many adverse reactions, including tinnitus, vertigo, syncope, and GI upset [72]. This was replaced by the combination of Atovaquone (750 mg every 12 hours) and Azithromycin (500 mg on day 1, then 250 mg per day) for 7 days, successfully clearing parasitemia and symptoms with significantly lower rates of adverse reactions [73]. In severe cases with high parasitemia, hemolysis, and renal or pulmonary involvement, exchange transfusion is the most appropriate treatment [74]. This helps to expel parasite-infected erythrocytes from circulation, as well as cytokines and thromboplastic agents that contribute to renal failure and the potential for disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC). However, this treatment has many risks and is not a standard routine [75]. In a standard case of babesiosis, Atovaquone and Azithromycin are currently the gold standard for definitive treatment.

Anaplasmosis

Epidemiology and Geographic Distribution

Anaplasmosis is an infection caused by the Anaplasma phagocytophilum [76]. It is a tick-borne condition transmitted by the Ixoides scapularis, also known as black-legged or deer tick in the Midwest and Northeastern US [77]; I. pacificus, I. persulcantus, and I. ricinus, are common vectors in Western US, in Asia, and Western Europe respectively [78,79]. A higher incidence of anaplasmosis is associated with the migration of humans to endemic areas and an increased deer population in the surrounding urban areas.

Pathogenesis and Clinical Manifestations

Anaplasmosis is a zoonotic disease on the rise caused by the intracellular gram-negative bacterium Anaplasma phagocytophilum, which predominantly spreads through bites from Ixodes ticks. In North America, Ixodes scapularis and Ixodes pacificus are the primary species, whereas in Europe, Ixodes ricinus serves as the primary vector [80,81]. The bacterium targets leukocytes and platelets, entering cells via phagocytosis and replicating within cytoplasmic vacuoles, forming morulae that can be observed under a microscope [82]. Transmission has also been reported via blood transfusions and organ transplants, demonstrating the bacterium’s ability to persist in the bloodstream and stored blood products [80-83]. The disease pathogenesis includes preventing the fusion of phagosomes with lysosomes, promoting bacterial replication within cells, and delaying apoptosis [81].

Clinical symptoms of anaplasmosis are diverse and nonspecific, often including high fever, headaches, muscle pain, general malaise, and gastrointestinal and respiratory issues [81,84]. Typical laboratory findings are leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and elevated liver enzymes [80]. Disease severity varies from mild to severe, with complications such as respiratory failure, multiorgan dysfunction, and neurological issues [83]. Around 50% of anaplasmosis patients require hospitalization, and 7% of these cases necessitate intensive care, with a mortality rate of up to 0.3% in North America [80,82]. Severe cases are less common in Europe compared to North America [81].

Various factors impact the disease’s presentation and severity. Exposure to ticks is a significant risk, particularly in endemic regions and during peak tick activity seasons (spring to autumn) [80,84]. The disease is more prevalent in adults over 40 and males [83]. Immunocompromised individuals, such as organ transplants and blood transfusion recipients, are more prone to severe infections due to weakened immune systems [82,84]. Furthermore, coinfections with other tick-borne pathogens like Borrelia burgdorferi and Babesia microti can complicate diagnosis and treatment, thereby increasing morbidity and mortality [81]. Geographic variations also affect disease epidemiology, with higher incidence rates in the northeastern and upper midwestern United States.

Diagnostic and Treatment Approaches

Diagnostic and treatment approaches for Ixodes tick-borne diseases face several challenges, particularly in the context of serological testing and molecular diagnostics. Serological tests, often used to detect antibodies against pathogens like Borrelia burgdorferi, can yield false negatives if conducted early in the infection when antibodies have not yet developed or false positives due to cross-reactivity with other bacteria [85]. Molecular diagnostics, such as PCR, offer the advantage of detecting pathogen DNA directly from clinical samples, yet their sensitivity and specificity limit them and the requirement for high-quality samples [86]. These diagnostic limitations complicate the accurate and timely diagnosis of diseases like Lyme disease, Anaplasmosis, and Babesiosis, often leading to delayed or inappropriate treatments.

The treatment options for Anaplasmosis primarily involve antibiotics, with doxycycline being the highly effective firstline treatment. Doxycycline is known for its prompt resolution of symptoms [87]. In cases where patients cannot tolerate doxycycline, alternatives like rifampin may be used. However, antiparasitic treatments are less common for Anaplasmosis than Babesiosis, which requires drugs like atovaquone and azithromycin due to its protozoan etiology [88]. Despite effective antibiotic regimens, treatment can be complicated by co-infections with other tick-borne pathogens, which may require concurrent therapies and complicate clinical management.

Challenges in treating Ixodes tick-borne diseases extend beyond initial antimicrobial therapy, including antimicrobial resistance issues and persistent symptoms. Some patients continue to experience symptoms, such as fatigue, pain, and cognitive difficulties, even after completing appropriate antibiotic courses—a condition sometimes referred to as Post- Treatment Lyme Disease Syndrome (PTLDS) [89]. The underlying causes of PTLDS are not fully understood but may involve lingering immune responses or persistent, low-level infections. Additionally, emerging resistance to standard antibiotics poses a significant threat, potentially limiting future treatment options and necessitating the development of novel therapeutics [90]. Addressing these challenges requires continued research into the pathophysiology of persistent symptoms, antimicrobial resistance mechanisms, and innovation in diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.

Innovations and Research Advances

Innovations and research advances in Ixodes tick-borne diseases have significantly enhanced our understanding and management of these infections. Recent innovations include the development of more accurate diagnostic tools and the identification of biomarkers for early detection. Advancements in CRISPR-based technologies have enabled precise genome editing of pathogens and their tick vectors, opening new avenues for studying the mechanisms of disease transmission and potential intervention strategies [91]. Applying artificial intelligence and machine learning to epidemiological data has improved predictive modeling of tick-borne disease outbreaks, aiding public health efforts in disease surveillance and control [92].

Advances in genomics, transcriptomics, and other omics technologies have provided more profound insights into hostpathogen interactions in tick-borne diseases. High-throughput sequencing and bioinformatics have facilitated comprehensive analyses of the genetic material of both Ixodes ticks and the pathogens they transmit. These studies have revealed complex gene expression and regulation networks underpinning the tick’s ability to harbor and transmit multiple pathogens [93]. Proteomics and metabolomics have further elucidated the biochemical pathways involved in infection and immune evasion, highlighting potential targets for therapeutic intervention [94]. Understanding these interactions at a molecular level is crucial for developing strategies to disrupt the life cycle of the pathogens within their tick hosts.

Exciting developments in discovering novel therapeutic targets and vaccine candidates are also emerging from these advanced research methodologies. Identifying unique surface proteins and metabolic enzymes in pathogens like Borrelia burgdorferi and Anaplasma Phagocytophilum has led to the development of targeted therapies that can disrupt essential biological processes in these organisms [95]. Furthermore, advances in immunology and vaccinology have facilitated the design of vaccines that elicit robust and long-lasting immune responses against multiple tickborne pathogens. Some of these vaccines, potentially potentially preventing diseases like Lyme disease and Anaplasmosis, are currently undergoing clinical trials and show great promise [96]. These innovations represent significant strides towards controlling and eventually eradicating tick-borne diseases, offering a brighter future in disease management.

Conclusion

The rising incidence and geographical spread of Ixodes tickborne diseases such as Lyme disease, babesiosis, and anaplasmosis underscore the urgent need for comprehensive strategies to address these public health challenges. The increasing prevalence of these diseases in regions like the USA, Europe, and Asia highlights the critical role of ticks as vectors and the expanding habitats that facilitate their spread. As evidenced by the literature, improved diagnostic methods, heightened awareness, and a deeper understanding of tick biology are paramount for effective prevention and control. The detailed exploration of Lyme disease reveals complex clinical presentations, from the hallmark erythema migrans in early stages to severe neurological, cardiac, and rheumatologic complications in later stages. The challenges in diagnosing Lyme disease, particularly during the early “window period” and the persistence of antibodies posttreatment, necessitate advancing more reliable diagnostic tools. Moreover, treatment approaches, while generally effective with early antibiotic intervention, require vigilance in managing latestage and post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome (PTLDS).

Babesiosis, predominantly transmitted by Ixodes scapularis, poses significant risks, particularly for immunocompromised individuals. The variability in clinical manifestations, ranging from asymptomatic to severe, life-threatening conditions, underscores the importance of accurate diagnosis through blood smears and PCR tests. Treatment regimens have evolved, with the combination of atovaquone and azithromycin becoming the gold standard due to its efficacy and reduced adverse effects compared to previous treatments. Anaplasmosis, another critical tick-borne disease, exhibits nonspecific symptoms complicating its diagnosis. The intracellular pathogen Anaplasma phagocytophilum targets leukocytes and platelets, leading to systemic complications. The reliance on serological and molecular diagnostic methods and effective antibiotic treatments like doxycycline highlights the need for prompt and accurate detection to mitigate severe outcomes. Addressing the global burden of Ixodes tick-borne diseases requires a multifaceted approach involving enhanced diagnostic techniques, effective treatment protocols, and robust public health initiatives. Collaborative efforts among researchers, healthcare professionals, and policymakers are essential to advance our understanding and management of these zoonotic infections, ultimately reducing their impact on human health. As tick populations and their associated pathogens expand, ongoing vigilance and innovation in infectious diseases are crucial to safeguarding public health.

References

1. Rochlin Ilia, Alvaro Toledo (2020) Emerging tick-borne pathogens of public health importance: a Mini-Review. Journal of medical microbiology 69(6): 781-791.
2. Reye Anna L, Valentina Stegniy, Nina P Mishaeva, Sviataslau Velhin, Judith M Hübschen, et al. (2013) Prevalence of Tick-Borne Pathogens in Ixodes ricinus and Dermacentor reticulatus Ticks from Different Geographical Locations in Belarus. PLoS ONE p. 8.
3. Telford Sam R, Heidi K Goethert (2004) Emerging tick-borne infections: rediscovered and better characterized, or truly ‘new’? Parasitology 129: S301- S327.
4. Fang Liqun et al. (2015) Emerging tick-borne infections in mainland China: an increasing public health threat. The Lancet. Infectious Diseases 15(12): 1467-1479.
5. Gray, Jeremy S (2002) Biology of Ixodes species ticks in relation to tick-borne zoonoses. Wiener klinische Wochenschrift 114(13-14): 473-478.
6. Gray Jeremy S (2016) Diapause in ticks of the medically important Ixodes ricinus species complex. Ticks and tick-borne diseases 7(5): 992-1003.
7. Eisen Rebecca J, Lars Eisen (2018) The Blacklegged Tick, Ixodes scapularis: An Increasing Public Health Concern. Trends in parasitology 34(4): 295-309.
8. Bingham-Byrne RM, Ozdenerol E (2024) Multi-Scale Analysis of Lyme Disease Ecology. Rheumato 4(2): 88-130.
9. Dizon C, Lysyk TJ, Couloigner I, Cork SC (2023) Ecology and Epidemiology of Lyme Disease in Western North America. Zoonotic Diseases 3(1): 20-37.
10. Patel PP, Puli S (2024) Lyme disease: ecological and epidemiological factors influencing increased global transmission. Journal of Preventive and Complementary Medicine 3(1): 41-49.
11. Radolf- Justin D (2020) Lyme Disease in Humans. Current Issues in Molecular Biology 42: 333-384.
12. Lingard, Jamie, et al. (2019) Lyme Disease. InnovAiT: Education and Inspiration for General Practice 12(6): 304–309.
13. Skar, Gwenn L, and Kari A Simonsen (2018) Lyme Disease. National Library of Medicine, StatPearls Publishing.
14. Steere AC, Grodzicki RL, Kornblatt AN, Craft JE, Barbour AG, et al. (1983) The spirochetal etiology of Lyme disease. N Engl J Med 308(13): 733-740.
15. Aguero-Rosenfeld ME, Nowakowski J, McKenna DF, Carbonaro CA, Wormser GP (1993) Serodiagnosis in early Lyme disease. J Clin Microbiol 31(12): 3090–3095.
16. Steere AC, McHugh G, Damle N, Sikand VK (2008) Prospective study of serologic tests for Lyme disease. Clin Infect Dis 47(2): 188–195.
17. Aguero-Rosenfeld ME, Nowakowski J, Bittker S, Cooper D, Nadelman RB, et al. (1996) Evolution of the serologic response to Borrelia burgdorferi in treated patients with culture-confirmed erythema migrans. J Clin Microbiol 34(1): 1–9.
18. Craft JE, Fischer DK, Shimamoto GT, Steere AC (1986) Antigens of Borrelia burgdorferi recognized during Lyme disease: appearance of a new immunoglobulin M response and expansion of the immunoglobulin G response later in the illness. J Clin Invest 78(4): 934–939.
19. Coleman JL, Benach JL (1987) Isolation of antigenic components from the Lyme disease spirochete: their role in early diagnosis. J Infect Dis 155(4): 756–765.
20. Dressler F, Whalen JA, Reinhardt BN, Steere AC (1993) Western blotting in the serodiagnosis of Lyme disease. J Infect Dis 167(2): 392–400.
21. Grodzicki RL, Steere AC (1988) Comparison of immunoblotting and indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using different antigen preparations for diagnosing early Lyme disease. J Infect Dis 157(4): 790–797.
22. Lawrenz MB, Hardham JM, Owens RT, Nowakowski J, Steere AC, et al. (1999) Human antibody responses to VlsE antigenic variation protein of Borrelia burgdorferi. J Clin Microbiol 37(12): 3997–4004.
23. Liang FT, Alvarez AL, Gu Y, Nowling JM, Ramamoorthy R, et al. (1999) An immunodominant conserved region within the variable domain of VlsE, the variable surface antigen of Borrelia burgdorferi. J Immunol 163(10): 5566–5573.
24. Engstrom SM, Shoop E, Johnson RC (1995) Immunoblot interpretation criteria for serodiagnosis of early Lyme disease. J Clin Microbiol 33(2): 419–427.
25. Padula SJ, Dias F, Sampieri A, Craven RB, Ryan RW (1994) Use of recombinant OspC from Borrelia burgdorferi for serodiagnosis of early Lyme disease. J Clin Microbiol 32(7): 1733–1738.
26. Wilske B, Preac-Mursic V, Schierz G, Busch KV (1986) Immunochemical and immunological analysis of European Borrelia burgdorferi strains. Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg A 263(1-2): 92–102.
27. Arnaboldi PM, Seedarnee R, Sambir M, Callister SM, Imparato JA, et al. (2013) Outer surface protein C peptide derived from Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto as a target for serodiagnosis of early Lyme disease. Clin Vaccine Immunol 20(4): 474–481.
28. Barbour AG, Jasinskas A, Kayala MA, Davies DH, Steere AC, et al. (2008) A genome-wide proteome array reveals a limited set of immunogens in natural infections of humans and white-footed mice with Borrelia burgdorferi. Infect Immun 76(8): 3374–3389.
29. Steere AC, Grodzicki RL, Kornblatt AN, Craft JE, Barbour AG, et al. (1983) The spirochetal etiology of Lyme disease. N Engl J Med 308(13): 733–740.
30. Szer IS, Taylor E, Steere AC (1991) The long-term course of Lyme arthritis in children. N Engl J Med 325: 159–163.
31. Kalish RA, McHugh G, Granquist J, Shea B, Ruthazer R, et al. (2001) Persistence of immunoglobulin M or immunoglobulin G antibody responses to Borrelia burgdorferi 10–20 years after active Lyme disease. Clin Infect Dis 33(6): 780–785.
32. Kannian P, McHugh G, Johnson BJ, Bacon RM, Glickstein LJ, et al. (2007) Antibody responses to Borrelia burgdorferi in patients with antibiotic-refractory, antibiotic-responsive, or non-antibiotic-treated Lyme arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 56(12): 4216–4225.
33. Aslam B, Nisar MA, Khurshid M, Farooq Salamat MK (2017) Immune escape strategies of Borrelia burgdorferi. Future Microbiol 12: 1219–1237.
34. Anderson C, Brissette CA (2021) The Brilliance of Borrelia: Mechanisms of Host Immune Evasion by Lyme Disease-Causing Spirochetes. Pathogens 10: 281.
35. Wormser GP, Nowakowski J, Nadelman RB, Visintainer P, Levin A, et al. (2008) Impact of clinical variables on Borrelia burgdorferi-specific antibody seropositivity in acute-phase sera from patients in North America with culture-confirmed early Lyme disease. CVI 15(10): 1519–1522.
36. Guérin M, Shawky M, Zedan A (2023) Lyme borreliosis diagnosis: state of the art improvements and innovations. BMC Microbiol 23: 204.
37. Chan K, Marras SA, Parveen N (2013) Sensitive multiplex PCR assay to differentiate Lyme spirochetes and emerging pathogens Anaplasma phagocytophilum and Babesia microti. BMC Microbiol 13: 295.
38. Aguero-Rosenfeld ME, Wang G, Schwartz I, Wormser GP (2005) Diagnosis of Lyme Borreliosis. Clin Microbiol Rev 18(18): 484–509.
39. Stanek G, Wormser GP, Gray J, Strle F (2012) Lyme borreliosis. The Lancet 379(9814): 461–473.
40. Stanek G, Strle F (2018) Lyme borreliosis–from tick bite to diagnosis and treatment. FEMS Microbiol Rev 42(3): 233–258.
41. Cabello FC, Embers ME, Newman SA, Godfrey HP (2022) Borreliella burgdorferi Antimicrobial-Tolerant Persistence in Lyme Disease and Posttreatment Lyme Disease Syndromes. mBio 13(3): e0344021.
42. Lyme disease. Erythema migrans rash.
43. Kowalski TJ, Tata S, Berth W, Mathiason MA, Agger WA (2010) Antibiotic treatment duration and long-term outcomes of patients with early Lyme disease from a Lyme disease-hyperendemic area. Clin Infect Dis 50(4): 512–520.
44. Angelette AL, Rando LL, Wadhwa RD, et al. (2023) Tetracycline-, doxycycline-, minocycline-induced pseudotumor cerebri and esophageal perforation. Adv Ther 40(4): 1366–1378.
45. Eppes SC, Childs JA (2002) Comparative study of cefuroxime axetil versus amoxicillin in children with early Lyme disease. Pediatrics 109(6): 1173–1177.
46. Puius YA, Kalish RA (2008) Lyme arthritis: pathogenesis, clinical presentation, and management. Infect Dis Clin North Am 22(2): 289–300.
47. Steere AC, Angelis SM (2006) Therapy for Lyme arthritis: strategies for the treatment of antibiotic-refractory arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 54: 3079–3086.
48. Wormser GP, Dattwyler RJ, Shapiro ED, Halperin JJ, Steere AC, et al. (2006) The clinical assessment, treatment, and prevention of Lyme disease, human granulocytic anaplasmosis, and babesiosis: clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 43(9): 1089–1134.
49. Liang FT, Yan J, Mbow ML, Sviat SL, Gilmore RD, et al. (2004) Borrelia burgdorferi changes its surface antigenic expression in response to host immune responses. Infect Immun 72(10): 5759–5767.
50. Coutte L, Botkin DJ, Gao L, Norris SJ (2009) Detailed analysis of sequence changes occurring during vlsE antigenic variation in the mouse model of Borrelia burgdorferi infection. PLoS Pathog 5(2): e1000293.
51. Radolf JD, Caimano MJ, Stevenson B, Hu LT (2012) Of ticks, mice and men: understanding the dual-host lifestyle of Lyme disease spirochaetes. Nat Rev Microbiol 10: 87–99.
52. Khatchikian CE, Nadelman RB, Nowakowski J, Schwartz I, Wormser GP, et al. (2014) Evidence for strain-specific immunity in patients treated for early Lyme disease. Infect Immun 82(4): 1408–1413.
53. Shapiro ED (2014) Clinical practice: Lyme disease. N Engl J Med 370(18): 1724–1731.
54. Swanson M, Pickrel A, Williamson J, Montgomery S (2023) Trends in Reported Babesiosis Cases — United States, 2011–2019. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 72(11): 273–277.
55. Kumar A, O'Bryan J, Krause PJ (2021) The Global Emergence of Human Babesiosis. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) 10(11): 1447.
56. Vannier EG, Diuk-Wasser MA, Ben Mamoun C, Krause PJ (2015) Babesiosis. Infect Dis Clin North Am 29(2): 357–370.
57. Milnes EL, Thornton G, Léveillé AN, Delnatte P, Barta JR, et al. (2019) Babesia odocoilei and zoonotic pathogens identified from Ixodes scapularis ticks in southern Ontario, Canada. Ticks and tick-borne diseases 10(3): 670–676.
58. Eisen RJ, Eisen L (2018) The Blacklegged Tick, Ixodes scapularis: An Increasing Public Health Concern. Trends in parasitology 34(4): 295–309.
59. (2021) CDC. Surveillance for babesiosis—United States, 2019 annual summary. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC.
60. Wilson ML, Telford SR, Piesman J, Spielman A (1988) Reduced abundance of immature Ixodes dammini (Acari: Ixodidae) following elimination of deer. Journal of medical entomology 25(4): 224–228.
61. Ruebush TK, Juranek DD, Chisholm ES, Snow PC, Healy GR, et al. (1977) Human babesiosis on Nantucket Island. Evidence for self-limited and subclinical infections. The New England journal of medicine 297(15): 825–827.
62. Vannier E, Krause PJ (2012) Human Babesiosis. N Engl J Med 366(25): 2397-2407.
63. Vannier EG, Diuk-Wasser MA, Ben Mamoun C, Krause PJ (2015) Babesiosis.. Infect Dis Clin North Am 29(2): 357-370.
64. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Tickborne Diseases of the United States: A Reference Manual for Health Care Providers.
65. Zimmer AJ, Simonsen KA (2023) Babesiosis. StatPearls Publishing.
66. Krause PJ, Auwaerter PG, Bannuru RR, Branda JA, Falck-Ytter YT, et al. (2021) Clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA): 2020 guideline on diagnosis and management of babesiosis. Clin Infect Dis 72(2): e49-e64.
67. Krause PJ (2003) Babesiosis Diagnosis and Treatment. Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases 3(1): 45-51.
68. Krause PJ, McKay K, Thompson CA, et al. (2002) Disease‐Specific Diagnosis of Coinfecting Tickborne Zoonoses: Babesiosis, Human Granulocytic Ehrlichiosis, and Lyme Disease. Clinical Infectious Diseases 34(9): 1184-1191.
69. Healy GR, Ruebush TK (1980) Morphology of Babesia microti in Human Blood Smears. American Journal of Clinical Pathology 73(1): 107-109.
70. Persing DH, Mathiesen D, Marshall WF, et al. (1992) Detection of Babesia microti by polymerase chain reaction. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 30(8): 2097-2103.
71. Chisholm ES, Ruebush TK, Sulzer AJ, Healy GR (1978) Babesia Microti Infection in Man: Evaluation of an Indirect Immunofluorescent Antibody Test. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 27(1): 14-19.
72. Krause PJ, Spielman A, Telford SR, et al. (1998) Persistent parasitemia after acute babesiosis. The New England Journal of Medicine 339(3): 160-165.
73. Bonoan JT, Johnson DH, Cunha BA (1998) Life-threatening babesiosis in an asplenic patient treated with exchange transfusion, azithromycin, and atovaquone. Heart & Lung 27(6): 424-428.
74. Cahill K, Benach J, Reich L, et al. (1981) Red cell exchange: treatment of babesiosis in a splenectomized patient. Transfusion 21(2): 193-198.
75. Evenson DA, Perry E, Kloster B, Hurley R, Stroncek DF (1998) Therapeutic apheresis for babesiosis. Journal of clinical apheresis 13(1): 32-36.
76. Chen SM, Dumler JS, Bakken JS, Walker DH (1994) Identification of a granulocytotropic Ehrlichia species as the etiologic agent of human disease. Journal of clinical microbiology 32(3): 589–595.
77. Dahlgren FS, Heitman KN, Drexler NA, Massung RF, Behravesh CB (2015) Human granulocytic anaplasmosis in the United States from 2008 to 2012: a summary of national surveillance data. The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene 93(1): 66–72.
78. Wang F, Ma M, Luo S, Yan M, Tao L, et al. (2019) Seroprevalence of Tick-Borne Anaplasma phagocytophilum Infection in Healthy Adult Population and Patients with Acute Undifferentiated Fever from the Yunnan Province of China. Vector borne and zoonotic diseases (Larchmont, N.Y.) 19(8): 576–581.
79. Guzman N, Yarrarapu SNS, Beidas SO (2023) Anaplasma Phagocytophilum. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): Stat Pearls Publishing.
80. Mowla SJ, Drexler NA, Cherry CC, Annambholta PD, Kracalik IT, Basavaraju SV (2021) Ehrlichiosis and Anaplasmosis among Transfusion and Transplant Recipients in the United States. Emerging Infectious Diseases 27(11): 2768-2775.
81. Leikauskas JA, Read JS, Kelso P, Heitman KN, Armstrong PA, et al. (2022) Anaplasmosis-Related Fatality in Vermont: A Case Report. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 22(3): 188–190.
82. Uran J, Cardona Arias JA (2019) Prevalence of Anaplasma spp. worldwide: Systematic review 1978-2018. Hechos Microbiol 10(1-2): 30-38.
83. Sanchez E, Vannier E, Wormser GP, Hu LT (2016) Diagnosis, Treatment and Prevention of Lyme Disease, Human Granulocytic Anaplasmosis and Babesiosis. AMA 315(16): 1767–1777.
84. Vidal Alzate J, Acevedo Castr T, Osorno Palacio D, Uran Velazquez J, Cardona Arias JA (2019) Prevalencia de Anaplasma SPP. En Humanos: Revision sistemática de la literatura entre 2000 y 2017. Rev.Investigaciones Andina 39(21).
85. Marques A (2015) Lyme Disease: A Review. Current Allergy and Asthma Reports 15(7): 42.
86. Schutzer SE, Body BA, Boyle J, Brisson D, Dattwyler RJ, et al. (2019) Direct diagnostic tests for Lyme disease. Clinical Infectious Diseases 68(6): 1052-1057.
87. Ismail N, Bloch KC, McBride JW (2017) Human ehrlichiosis and anaplasmosis. Clinical Laboratory Medicine 37(2): 317-340.
88. Krause PJ, Auwaerter PG, Bannuru RR, Branda JA, Falck-Ytter YT, et al. (2018) Clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA): 2018 update. Clinical Infectious Diseases 66(9): e1-e49.
89. Aucott JN, Rebman AW, Crowder LA, Kortte KB (2013) Post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome symptomatology and the impact on life functioning: Is there something here? Quality of Life Research 22(1): 75-84.
90. Lantos PM, Rumbaugh J, Bockenstedt LK, Falck-Ytter YT, Aguero-Rosenfeld ME, et al. (2020) Clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA): 2020 guideline on diagnosis and management of tick-borne diseases. Clinical Infectious Diseases 71(4): 1-9.
91. Bhandari V, Naushad HS, Gupta RS (2020) Advances in CRISPR-Cas9 technology: Applications in understanding and treatment of infectious diseases. Molecular Biology Reports 47(9): 6769-6780.
92. Beckham JD, Tyler KL, Ragan IK (2021) Artificial intelligence in predicting infectious disease outbreaks. Trends in Microbiology 29(9): 755-767.
93. Rudenko N, Golovchenko M, Vancová M, Clark K, Grubhoffer L, et al. (2019) Metagenomics analysis of the bacterial microbiota in Ixodes ticks. Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases 19(5): 346-354.
94. Hajdusek O, Šíma R, Ayllón N, Jalovecká M, Perner J, et al. (2020) Interactions of the tick immune system with transmitted pathogens. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology 10: 619674.
95. Steere AC, Coburn J, Glickstein L (2016) The emergence of Lyme disease. Journal of Clinical Investigation 126(4): 1097-1107.
96. Schuijt TJ, Hovius JW, van Burgel ND, Ramamoorthi N, Fikrig E, et al. (2011) The tick salivary protein Salp15 inhibits the killing of Borrelia burgdorferi by antibody and complement. Journal of Infectious Diseases 203(3): 465-468.