Disclaimer: Early release articles are not considered as final versions. Any changes will be reflected in the online version in the month the article is officially released.

Author affiliation: New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York, USA (D.T. Gaber, M.A. Prusinski, A. Hodge, Z. LaTerra, M. D’Amico, M. Perry, J.L. White); Arthropod-Borne Disease Laboratory, Suffolk County Department of Health Services, Yaphank, New York, USA (A. White, M.P. Santoriello, C.L. Romano, S.R. Campbell)

Francisella tularensis is a highly infectious, gram-negative bacterium that causes tularemia and may be transmitted through several pathways, including bites from infected ticks (primarily Amblyomma americanum and Dermacentor variabilis in the northeastern United States), deer flies (Chrysops species), contact with infected animals, ingestion of contaminated food or water, and inhalation of infectious aerosols (1). Clinical manifestations vary by route of exposure and consist of 6 primary forms, glandular, oculoglandular, oropharyngeal, pneumonic, typhoidal, and ulceroglandular; ulceroglandular is most common in the United States (2). Although treatable with antimicrobial drugs (1,3), case-fatality rates can reach 24% depending on clinical form and infecting subspecies (4,5).

The literature shows reports of tularemia from every US state except Hawaii; most historical cases have occurred in the south-central and Pacific Northwest regions (6). Incidence peaked in 1939, with 2,291 cases, and case rates remain highest during May–September, coinciding with periods of increased tick activity (1). Nationally, reported cases increased by 56% during 2011–2022 compared with 2001–2010, partly reflecting improved diagnostics (7). Incidence among American Indian and Alaska Native populations remain ≈5 times higher than among White persons, highlighting ongoing demographic disparities (7).

The state of New York, USA, recorded the first documented case of tularemia in 1927 and linked the transmission to rabbit consumption (8). Although tularemia remains rare, averaging <1 case/year in the state (9), recent reports show an increase in tularemia cases, particularly from Long Island, where Suffolk County sees >1 case/year (9). In response, the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) and the Suffolk County Department of Health Services initiated enhanced F. tularensis surveillance in ticks and conducted a retrospective analysis of human cases to better define tularemia epidemiology in this region.

We analyzed tularemia cases during 1993–2023 retrospectively for all New York counties, excluding New York City. As mandated by New York public health law, clinicians electronically reported provider-diagnosed tularemia cases and positive laboratory test results for F. tularensis to the NYSDOH (10,11), prompting their investigation by local health departments, who entered clinical and demographic information into the NYSDOH Communicable Disease Electronic Surveillance System (11). We classified reports based on the tularemia national surveillance case definition at the time of diagnosis (7). We included confirmed or probable cases in our study. We mapped cases in ArcGIS Pro 3.2 (Esri, https://www.esri.com) by county of residence, mapping Suffolk County cases also by residence postal (ZIP) code.

Figure

Human tularemia cases mapped by county of residence, New York, USA, 1993–2023. Year of case diagnosis shown. Inset displays tularemia cases by postal (ZIP) code tabulation area of residence, Suffolk County, New York, 1993–2023, overlaid with cumulative host-seeking tick density (2019–2023). Tick density expressed as ticks per 1,000 m2 sampled (nymphs and adults combined), cumulative over the surveillance period. Red marker indicates location of the Francisella tularensis–positive tick pool.

Figure. Human tularemia cases mapped by county of residence, New York, USA, 1993–2023. Year of case diagnosis shown. Inset displays tularemia cases by postal (ZIP) code tabulation area of residence, Suffolk…

We analyzed data relevant to demographic and epidemiologic characteristics of tularemia cases (Table), revealing that cases were predominately among White men, with an average age of 40.7 years. Our case-fatality rate of 6.7% among cases with a known outcome (n = 15) was higher than the ≈2% previously reported (5), although outcome was recorded in only 50% of our cases. We obtained sufficient clinical data to enable determination of disease form in 15 cases (50%): 10 case-patients had ulceroglandular/glandular tularemia, 3 had pneumonic tularemia, 1 had cellulitis, and 1 died as a result of sepsis and renal failure that developed in the setting of underlying chronic conditions. Half of cases (n = 15) were from counties on Long Island. Of those, 13 occurred in Suffolk County, representing 43% of the total reported cases during the study period, with 69% of all Suffolk County cases reported recently (2014–2023) (Figure). Reported cases of tularemia have emerged sporadically from across New York since 1993 at a rate of <1 case/year on average, but 50% of cases were reported during the last decade of the study: 67% from Long Island and 33% from elsewhere in the state (Figure).

We carried out standardized drag sampling of host-seeking A. americanum and D. variabilis ticks as previously described (12) during 2019–2023 at 21 surveillance sites across Suffolk County with suitable habitat for ticks and their vertebrate hosts or locations tied epidemiologically to tularemia cases. We collected a total of 27,158 ticks and pooled them by species, developmental stage, site, and collection date (up to 20 nymphs or 10 adult female or male ticks each) for nucleic acid extraction as previously described (12). We collected an additional 517 D. variabilis ticks from 57 locations in 18 other New York counties during the same timeframe. We screened the resulting 3,220 pools for F. tularensis using an in-house–validated real-time PCR targeting the Tul4 gene, capable of detecting multiple subspecies (13) (Appendix). We calculated measures of tick population density (ticks per 1,000 m2 sampled) and minimum infection rate at the site level (12). We overlayed average tick density values on a map of Suffolk County tularemia cases using ArcGIS Pro.

Of 17,921 A. americanum nymphs collected, 1 pool tested positive for F. tularensis. Those ticks were collected on July 23, 2020, from Southampton Township, which had an F. tularensis minimum infection rate of 0.42% and the highest overall tick population density, averaging 266.8 ticks/1,000 m2 sampled (Figure). Tularemia cases tended to be reported in residents of higher tick density regions of Suffolk County (Figure).

This study underscores the importance of ongoing human disease and vector surveillance, particularly in Suffolk County, where nearly half of New York tularemia case-patients resided during 1993–2023 and where we observed a recent increase in reported cases beginning in 2014. The demographics of New York tularemia cases resembled those observed nationally. Case-patients were predominantly White men, although the median age in New York (38.5 years) was lower than reported nationally (48 years) (7). The case-fatality rate of 6.7% in our study was higher than the ≈2% previously reported (5), but interpretation is limited because outcome was recorded in only 50% of the cases we report (n = 15). We did not observe increased incidence in American Indian or Alaskan Indigenous populations in New York; however, our data did not include race and ethnicity in nearly 27% of cases. Increased effort to improve the accuracy and completeness of communicable disease surveillance reporting data obtained from medical providers and patients during public health case investigations would enable better elucidation of epidemiologic risk factors associated with tularemia in New York.

Despite extensive sampling over 4 years, the prevalence of F. tularensis in ticks was low, highlighting the potential importance of other infection routes. The detection of F. tularensis in A. americanum nymphs from Southampton and the variability in tick densities across Suffolk County locations point to localized ecologic factors influencing tick distribution and subsequent tick bite exposure risk. Tularemia cases tended to be reported in residents of higher tick density regions of Suffolk County, but averaging tick density values across sampling years and tick developmental stages limits temporal interpretability. Rising temperatures and changing precipitation patterns may lengthen the seasonal window of vector activity and alter host population dynamics and enzootic transmission cycles, ultimately affecting human exposure risk (14). This possibility is particularly relevant to coastal New York, where environmental changes could increase seasonal exposure risk (15), reinforcing the need for continued tick surveillance and targeted public health interventions.

Given tularemia’s broad geographic distribution in the United States, prevention efforts should focus on increasing public and provider awareness, ensuring timely diagnosis, and promoting effective prevention strategies. Continued human and vector surveillance remains critical for early detection and risk assessment. However, the timeliness and completeness of epidemiologic data associated with human tularemia cases is paramount to gaining a better understanding of disease etiology.

Mr. Gaber is a health science student at Boston University’s Sargent College of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences and an intern with the Association of Public Health Laboratories at the Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health. His research interests focus on the epidemiology of tickborne pathogens, with a particular emphasis on the pathophysiology and etiology of human infections. Dr. Prusinski is a research scientist, laboratory supervisor, and Deputy Director of Vector Surveillance with the Vector Ecology Laboratory, Bureau of Communicable Disease Control, New York State Department of Health. Her research focuses on the ecology and epidemiology of tickborne and other arthropodborne diseases.

Top

The authors thank the following individuals: P. Egan, S. Yang, E. Daniel, J. Dwyer, J. Goldstein, S. Kutchava, T. Zembsch, L. Rose, A. Dupuis, J. Maffei, L. Tomaszek, C. Koetzner, J. Stout, A. Ciota, M. Meola, A. Chiefari, and C. Egan for their assistance with tick collections, tick identification, specimen accessioning, sample preparation, and pathogen testing. We also thank A. Kaufman for human case data compilation and exploratory analysis.

Funding was provided by the NYSDOH, the Wadsworth Center, and Association of Public Health Laboratories Internship Subaward Program to the NYSDOH Wadsworth Center from US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Cooperative Agreement #NU60OE000104).



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *