Search Results - (Author, Cooperation:B. Weide)

2015-09-12

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

0036-8075

1095-9203

Biology

Chemistry and Pharmacology

Computer Science

Medicine

Natural Sciences in General

Physics

Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Antibodies, Monoclonal/*pharmacology/therapeutic use ; Antigens, Neoplasm/*genetics ; *Biomarkers, Pharmacological ; CTLA-4 Antigen/*antagonists & inhibitors ; Cell Cycle Checkpoints/genetics/immunology ; Cohort Studies ; DNA Mutational Analysis ; Drug Resistance, Neoplasm/genetics ; Exome ; Female ; Genomics ; HLA Antigens/genetics ; Humans ; Male ; Melanoma/*drug therapy/*genetics/secondary ; Middle Aged ; Mutation ; Skin Neoplasms/*drug therapy/*genetics/pathology ; Tumor Microenvironment/drug effects/immunology ; Young Adult

1365-2133

Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005

Medicine

Background The aetiology of morphoea is still unknown. Borrelia burgdorferi as a causative agent of morphoea has been discussed since 1985, but the relationship remains uncertain. Objectives We aimed to find evidence for infection with B. burgdorferi by combined evaluation of different clinical and laboratory data in a group of 54 patients with morphoea. Methods In each patient, an evaluation of the case history was performed with regard to infection with B. burgdorferi, using a standardized questionnaire. Questions focused on previous tick bites and skin changes suspicious for erythema migrans (EM). The case history data of 52 patients were compared with those of 104 matched control subjects and of 25 patients with acrodermatitis chronica atrophicans (ACA). Serological examinations were performed in 53 patients with morphoea. Furthermore, lesional skin was examined for borrelial DNA in 33 patients, using nested polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for the ospA and the borrelial rRNA gene. Results Results of the questionnaire showed no differences between patients with morphoea and matched controls. In contrast, patients with ACA showed a much higher prevalence of tick bites and skin changes suspicious for EM as compared with patients with morphoea. Serological examination was positive in only one patient with morphoea alone and in two additional patients with coexistent ACA. No borrelial DNA was detected by PCR in lesional skin of 33 patients with morphoea. Conclusions No evidence was found for B. burgdorferi infection in patients with morphoea.

Electronic Resource

1365-2133

Blackwell Publishing Journal Backfiles 1879-2005

Medicine

The aetiology of morphoea and lichen sclerosus et atrophicus is still unknown. Since the detection of Borrelia burgdorferi (B. burgdorferi) as the causative agent of Lyme disease, there has been debate about a possible association between B. burgdorferi and morphoea. Initial serological and cultural studies showed controversial results. The introduction of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) initially suggested an association between B. burgdorferi and morphoea. We reviewed the literature on B. burgdorferi (specific serology, immunohistology, culture, lymphocyte stimulation and DNA detection by PCR) since 1983, using Medline and Current Contents. Histological and immunohistological detection of B. burgdorferi was reported in 0–40% (20 of 82) of the cases with morphoea and in 46–50% (17 of 36) of the cases with lichen sclerosus et atrophicus. Cultivation of spirochetes from lesional skin succeeded in five patients (five of 68) with morphoea, but failed in patients with lichen sclerosus et atrophicus. In Europe and Asia, serological detection of antibodies against B. burgdorferi was described in 0–60% (138 of 609) of patients with morphoea and in 19% (six of 32) in the U.S.A. For lichen sclerosus et atrophicus 0–25% of the published cases (three of 23) in Europe and Asia were seropositive. DNA from B. burgdorferi was detected by PCR in 0–100% (17 of 82) of the tissues of patients with morphoea in Europe and Asia, but not a single case among 98 patients was reported to be positive from the U.S.A. In Europe and Asia, borrelial DNA was detected in 0–100% (nine of 28) of the cases with lichen sclerosus et atrophicus, whereas in the U.S.A. none of 48 patients was positive. There are two possible explanations for these contradictory findings: the most likely is that B. burgdorferi is not a causative agent for morphoea. Another possible explanation could be that a subset of morphoea is caused by a special subspecies of B. burgdorferi that is present in Europe and Asia but does not occur in the U.S.A.

Electronic Resource