Trends in canine seroprevalence to Borrelia burgdorferi and Anaplasma spp. in the eastern USA, 2010-2017

Background Borrelia burgdorferi and Anaplasma phagocytophilum are tick-borne infections transmitted by Ixodes scapularis in the eastern USA; both agents cause disease in dogs and people. To characterize changes in seroprevalence over time, Cochran Armitage trend tests were used to evaluate percent positive test results for antibodies to B. burgdorferi and Anaplasma spp. in approximately 20 million canine tests from 2010-2017 in 25 states and 905 counties in the eastern USA. Results A significant decreasing trend in seroprevalence to B. burgdorferi was evident in eight states along the mid-Atlantic coast from Virginia to New Hampshire, and in Wisconsin. In contrast, a continued increasing trend was evident in five northeastern and Midwestern states where Lyme borreliosis is endemic or emerging, as well as in three southern states where endemicity has not yet been widely established. Similarly, seroprevalence to Anaplasma spp. showed a significant, although smaller, decreasing trend in five states along the mid-Atlantic coast from Virginia to Connecticut and Rhode Island, as well as in Minnesota and Wisconsin in the Midwest; despite the fact that those trends were significant they were weak. However, a strong increasing trend was evident in Massachusetts and three states in northern New England as well as in Pennsylvania. Conclusions As expected, seroprevalence continued to increase in regions where Lyme borreliosis and anaplasmosis are more newly endemic. However, the declining seroprevalence evident in other areas was not anticipated. Although the reasons for the decreasing trends are not clear, our finding may reflect shifting ecologic factors that have resulted in decreased infection risk or the combined positive influence of canine vaccination, tick control, and routine testing of dogs in regions where these infections have long been endemic. Analysis of trends in canine test results for tick-borne infections continues to be a valuable tool to understand relative geographical and temporal risk for these zoonotic agents.