Search

The tick-borne multisystemic infection caused by Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato , Lyme borreliosis, or Lyme disease, occurring in temperate regions of the northern hemisphere, continues to spread geographically with the expanding tick population. Despite the rising perceived risk of infection in the population, the clinical diagnosis of Borrelia infection is not always obvious and the most important laboratory test, antibody detection, has limited accuracy in diagnosing active disease. According to international guidelines, the primary serology test, which has a high sensitivity-low specificity, should, be verified using a high specificity confirmation test to improve the specificity. However, this enhancement in specificity comes at the cost of lower sensitivity. This two-step procedure is often omitted in everyday clinical practice. An optimal primary test would be one where no secondary tests for confirmation would be necessary. In the present study, the performance of a novel assay for quantitating IgG1-subclass antibodies to Borrelia C6-peptide was compared to a commercial reference assay of total IgG and IgM antibodies to Borrelia C6-peptide in the setting of a high endemic area for borreliosis. A derivation study on a retrospective clinical material was performed to compare the performance parameters and assess the discriminatory properties of the assays, followed by a prospective validation study. The IgG1-antibody assay achieved comparable summary performance parameters to those of the reference assay. The sensitivity was almost 100% while the specificity was about 50%. In a high-endemic setting, characterized by high background seropositivity of about 50% and disease prevalence of approximately 10%, antibody tests are unable to rule-in active Borrelia infection. The rule-out assessment of the methods revealed that of 1000 patients, 7 - 54 with negative results based on the reference method could have an active Borrelia infection. Such uncertainty was not found for the index test and may help improve the risk classification of patients., Competing Interests: DN, SO, and S-AC are partners in the Bimelix Laboratory. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Nyman, Nordberg, Nyberg, Olausson, Carlströmer Berthen and Carlsson.)

Lyme borreliosis (LB), caused by spirochetes belonging to the Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato complex, is the most common tick-borne infection in Europe. Laboratory diagnosis of LB is mainly based on the patients' medical history, clinical signs and symptoms in combination with detection of Borrelia-specific antibodies where indirect enzyme-linked-immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is the most widely used technique. The objective of the study was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy (sensitivities and specificities) of serological tests that are currently in use for diagnosis of LB in clinical laboratories in Northern Europe, by use of a large serum panel. The panel consisted of 195 serum samples from well-characterized and classified patients under investigation for clinically suspected LB (n = 59) including patients with Lyme neuroborreliosis, Lyme arthritis, acrodermatitis chronica atrophicans, erythema migrans or other diseases (n = 112). A total of 201 serum samples from healthy blood donors were also included. The panel (396 serum samples altogether) was sent to 12 clinical laboratories (using five different ELISA methods) as blinded for group affiliation and the laboratories were asked to perform serological analysis according to their routine procedure. The results from the study demonstrated high diagnostic concordance between the laboratories using the same diagnostic assay and lower diagnostic concordance between laboratories using different diagnostic assays. For IgG, the results were in general rather homogenous and showed an average sensitivity of 88% (range 85-91%) compared to IgM which showed lower average sensitivity of 59% (range 50-67%) and more heterogeneous results between assays and laboratories.

Lyme borreliosis (LB) is a common and increasing tick-borne disease in Europe. The risk of acquiring a Borrelia infection after a tick bite is not fully known. Therefore, we investigated the incidence of Borrelia infection after a bite by a Borrelia-infected tick and if the Borrelia load and/or the duration of tick-feeding influenced the risk of infection. During 2008-2009, ticks and blood samples were collected from 1546 tick-bitten persons from Sweden and the Åland Islands, Finland. Follow-up blood samples were taken 3 months after the tick bite. The duration of tick feeding was microscopically estimated and Borrelia was detected and quantified in ticks by real-time PCR. Anti-Borrelia antibodies were detected in sera using ELISA tests and immunoblot. Five percent (78/1546) of the study participants developed Borrelia infection (LB diagnosis and/or seroconversion) after a tick bite (45% bitten by Borrelia-infected ticks and 55% bitten by uninfected ticks). Of these, 33 developed LB (whereof 9 also seroconverted) while 45 participants seroconverted only. Experience of non-specific symptoms was more frequently reported by Borrelia-infected participants compared to uninfected participants. All who seroconverted removed "their" ticks significantly later than those who did not. The Borrelia load in the ticks did not explain the risk of seroconversion. Regional and sex differences in the Borrelia seroprevalence were found. The risk of developing a Borrelia infection after a bite by a Borrelia-infected tick is small but increases with the duration of tick feeding., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.)