Current and novel therapies for Lyme disease

Unorthodox alternative therapies marketed to treat Lyme disease

BACKGROUND

Some patients with medically unexplained symptoms or alternative medical diagnoses suspect that they chronically suffer from the tick-borne infection Lyme disease. These patients are commonly targeted by providers of alternative therapies. This study was designed to identify and characterize the range of unorthodox alternative therapies advertised to patients with a diagnosis of Lyme disease.

METHODS

Internet searches using the Google search engine were performed to identify the websites of clinics and services that marketed nonantimicrobial therapies for Lyme disease. We subsequently used the PubMed search engine to identify any scientific studies evaluating such treatments for Lyme disease. Websites were included in our review so long as they advertised a commercial, nonantimicrobial product or service that specifically mentioned utility for Lyme disease. Websites with patient testimonials (such as discussion groups) were excluded unless the testimonial appeared as marketing on a commercial site.

RESULTS

More than 30 alternative treatments were identified, which fell into several broad categories: these included oxygen and reactive oxygen therapy; energy and radiation-based therapies; nutritional therapy; chelation and heavy metal therapy; and biological and pharmacological therapies ranging from certain medications without recognized therapeutic effects on Borrelia burgdorgeri to stem cell transplantation. Review of the medical literature did not substantiate efficacy or, in most cases, any rationale for the advertised treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers of alternative therapies commonly target patients who believe they have Lyme disease. The efficacy of these unconventional treatments for Lyme disease is not supported by scientific evidence, and in many cases they are potentially harmful.

Lyme disease: point/counterpoint

Lyme disease represents a growing public health threat. The controversial science and politics of Lyme disease have created barriers to reliable diagnosis and effective treatment of this protean illness. Two major clinical hurdles are the absence of a therapeutic end point in treating Borrelia burgdorferi, the spirochetal agent of Lyme disease, and the presence of tickborne coinfections with organisms such as Babesia, Anaplasma, Ehrlichia and Bartonella that may complicate the course of the disease. From a pathophysiologic standpoint, the affinity of Borrelia burgdorferi for multiple cell types and the presence of nonreplicating forms of the Lyme disease spirochete have contributed to persistent infection and failure of simple antibiotic regimens. Newer approaches to the treatment of Lyme disease should take into account its clinical complexity in coinfected patients and the possible need for prolonged combination therapy in patients with persistent symptoms of this potentially debilitating illness. The optimal antibiotic regimen for chronic Lyme disease remains to be determined.

[Microbiological and pharmacological data useful for the treatment of Lyme disease. Treatment and follow up of early Lyme disease (erythema migrans)]

The aim of this review was first to analyze the microbiological and pharmacological criteria used to choose a treatment for Lyme disease. The determination of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato susceptibility to antibiotics is difficult, especially because of the lack of standardization in the methods used. In vitro data is helpful to determine Lyme treatment but discrepancies between in vitro and in vivo results highlight the need to confirm this data by clinical trials. The second part is an analysis of the literature made to evaluate the current strategies of treatment and follow up of early Lyme disease characterized by erythema migrans (EM). beta-lactams (penicillin G and V, amoxicillin, cefuroxime axetil, ceftriaxone), tetracyclines (doxycycline), and macrolides (mainly azithromycin) are the drugs most frequently used during clinical trials. The comparison between treatments is difficult because of the lack of reliable clinical and biological criteria to identify complete recovery. However the prognosis of treated EM is good in most trials. If a clinical follow-up remains necessary after the treatment of an EM, prolonged antibody production among asymptomatic patients reduces the interest of a serological follow-up.

Traitement et suivi des phases secondaire et tertiaire de la borréliose de Lyme

The aim of this review was to analyze the current strategies of treatment and follow-up of disseminated and late Lyme borreliosis. A comprehensive search was performed using the Medline database. Only relevant reviews, expert guidelines and randomized controlled clinical trials were selected and, if necessary, open trials. Major drugs used in these studies were amoxicillin, doxycycline, penicillin G, and ceftriaxone. Oral administration of antibiotics was preferred in Lyme arthritis whereas parenteral drugs were mostly used in neuroborreliosis. The treatment duration usually ranged from 14 to 30 days. Prolonged antibiotic courses recommended by some authors in post-Lyme syndromes were not validated by several randomized placebo controlled studies. Follow up patterns were analyzed in order to determine possible prognosis parameters allowing to distinguih active Borrelia burgdorferi infection from a sequel of infection.

Lyme disease: the quest for magic bullets

Lyme disease represents a growing public health threat. Recent molecular and genetic studies have confirmed that Borrelia burgdorferi, the spirochetal agent of Lyme disease, is one of the most complex bacteria known to man. Affinity for multiple cell types and the presence of non-replicating forms of B. burgdorferi have contributed to persistent infection and failure of simple antibiotic regimens. The controversial clinical science of Lyme disease has impeded reliable diagnosis and effective treatment of this protean illness. Two major clinical hurdles are the absence of a therapeutic endpoint in treating Lyme disease and the presence of tick-borne coinfections that may complicate the course of the illness. New strategies for the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of Lyme disease are urgently needed.

Atovaquone plus cholestyramine in patients coinfected with Babesia microti and Borrelia burgdorferi refractory to other treatment

Ten percent of US patients with Lyme disease are coinfected with Babesia microti. A double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial enrolled 25 patients with confirmed Borrelia burgdorferi/B microti coinfection, abnormal visual contrast sensitivity (VCS), and persistent symptoms despite prior treatment with atovaquone and azithromycin. Patients were randomly assigned to atovaquone suspension or placebo plus cholestyramine for 3 weeks, were crossed over for 3 weeks, and then received open-label atovaquone and cholestyramine for 6 weeks. Symptoms and VCS scores were recorded at baseline and after weeks 3, 6, 9, and 12. Improvements in symptoms and VCS deficits were observed only after at least 9 weeks of treatment. At week 12, 5 patients were asymptomatic, and 16 had a notable reduction in the number of symptoms. The entire cohort demonstrated significant increases in VCS scores. Adverse effects were rare. Patients coinfected with B burgdorferi and B microti derive measurable clinical benefit from prolonged treatment with atovaquone and cholestyramine. Longer-term combination therapy may be indicated.

Review of treatment options for lyme borreliosis

Lyme borreliosis (Lyme disease) is the most common tick-borne bacterial infection and the incidence is increasing in parts of Europe and the USA. Prompt antimicrobial therapy using oral agents such as doxycycline or amoxicillin is successful among more than 90% of patients. Inadequate penetration of oral agents into the CNS may result in the development of overt neuroborreliosis. The parenteral agent ceftriaxone is the drug of choice for severe acute and chronic infections, due to good penetration into CSF, convenient single daily dosage regimen and proven high efficacy in clinical trials involving a wide variety of disseminated infections. Regardless of therapeutic agent, there appears to a small minority of patients (<10%) who do not respond; such cases may be due to long-term persistence of borrelial cysts and to misdiagnoses based solely on seropositivity. Several adjunct therapies are available, including hyperbaric oxygen therapy and immune system supplements, but clinical trials have yet to be conducted.

Evidence-based guidelines for the management of Lyme disease

This report, completed in November 2003, is intended to serve as a resource for physicians, public health officials and organizations involved in the evaluation and treatment of Lyme disease.

The Lyme Wars: time to listen

Lyme disease represents a public health threat of major proportions. The murky science and acrimonious politics of Lyme disease have created barriers to reliable diagnosis and effective treatment of this protean illness. Two major clinical problems with the disease are the absence of a therapeutic end point in treating Borrelia burgdorferi, the spirochetal agent of Lyme disease, and the presence of tick-borne co-infections, such as babesiosis, anaplasmosis and bartonellosis, that may complicate the course of the illness. From a pathophysiological standpoint, the affinity of B. burgdorferi for multiple cell types and the presence of non-replicating forms of the spirochete have contributed to persistent infection and failure of simple antibiotic regimens. Newer approaches to the treatment of Lyme disease should take into account its clinical complexity in co-infected patients and the possible need for prolonged combination therapy in patients with persistent symptoms of this potentially debilitating illness. The risk and prevention of human transmission of Lyme disease merit further study.

The Lyme disease controversies continue

Within both the biomedical and lay community, Lyme disease continues to evoke considerable disagreements, especially regarding its diagnosis, patient management and treatment. A recent article of mine, published in this journal, dealing primarily with therapy for Lyme disease, subsequently led to a highly critical commentary on some of its content. Too often, however, the authors of these criticisms came to premature conclusions based mostly on little or no published data. Instead, they relied almost exclusively on highly speculative theories and on citing the uncorroborated published or unpublished findings and anecdotal reports of others in an attempt to substantiate their weak claims. In this reply account of mine, I respond by providing compelling evidence, derived primarily from the extensive peer-reviewed published literature, that runs counter to most of their key critical concerns. Another goal here is to further clarify certain inconsistencies, related to the epidemiology and microbiology of Lyme disease and its causative agent, including the dubious 'cyst forms', that have an important bearing on therapy.