Literature DB >> 35418241

Multicenter Clinical Evaluation of Modified Two-Tiered Testing Algorithms for Lyme Disease Using Zeus Scientific Commercial Assays.

Maroun M Sfeir1, Jennifer K Meece2, Elitza S Theel3, Dane Granger3, Thomas R Fritsche2, Allen C Steere4, John A Branda4.   

Abstract

Modified two-tiered testing (MTTT) algorithms for Lyme disease (LD), which involve the sequential use of orthogonal enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) without immunoblotting, are acceptable alternatives to standard two-tiered testing (STTT; EIA followed by immunoblots) provided the EIAs have been FDA-cleared for this intended use. We evaluated four Zeus Scientific LD EIAs used in two distinct MTTT algorithms for FDA review. MTTT 1 used a VlsE1/pepC10 polyvalent EIA followed by a whole-cell sonicate (WCS) polyvalent EIA. MTTT 2 used the same first-tier EIA followed by separate IgM and IgG WCS EIAs. In a retrospective phase, we compared each MTTT algorithm to STTT using archived samples from LD patients or control subjects. In a prospective phase, we used the same algorithms to analyze consecutive excess samples submitted for routine LD serology to three clinical laboratories. For the retrospective phase, MTTTs 1 and 2 were more sensitive (56% and 74%) than STTT (41%; P ≤ 0.03) among 61 patients with acute erythema migrans (EM). In LD patients with neuroborreliosis, carditis, or arthritis (n = 75), sensitivity was comparable between algorithms (96 to 100%; P = 1.0). Among 190 control subjects without past LD, all algorithms were highly and comparably specific (≥99%, P = 0.48). For the prospective phase, (n = 2,932), positive percent-agreement (PPA), negative percent-agreement (NPA), and overall agreement of MTTT 1 with STTT were 93%, 97.7% and 97.4% (kappa 0.80). MTTT 2 yielded higher PPA (98%) but lower NPA (96.1%) and overall agreement (96.2%, kappa 0.74; all P < 0.05). Compared with STTT, both MTTT algorithms provided increased sensitivity in EM patients, comparable sensitivity in later disease and non-inferior specificity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Borrelia; Borrelia burgdorferi; Lyme disease; diagnostics; immunodiagnostics; serology

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35418241      PMCID: PMC9116174          DOI: 10.1128/jcm.02528-21

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   11.677


  17 in total

1.  Two-tiered antibody testing for Lyme disease with use of 2 enzyme immunoassays, a whole-cell sonicate enzyme immunoassay followed by a VlsE C6 peptide enzyme immunoassay.

Authors:  John A Branda; Katy Linskey; Yeowon A Kim; Allen C Steere; Mary Jane Ferraro
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 9.079

2.  Collection and characterization of samples for establishment of a serum repository for lyme disease diagnostic test development and evaluation.

Authors:  Claudia R Molins; Christopher Sexton; John W Young; Laura V Ashton; Ryan Pappert; Charles B Beard; Martin E Schriefer
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-08-13       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Evaluation of Modified Two-Tiered Testing Algorithms for Lyme Disease Laboratory Diagnosis Using Well-Characterized Serum Samples.

Authors:  Adoracion Pegalajar-Jurado; Martin E Schriefer; Ryan J Welch; Marc R Couturier; Tiffany MacKenzie; Rebecca J Clark; Laura V Ashton; Mark J Delorey; Claudia R Molins
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Higher Sensitivity of the recomLine Borrelia IgG Immunoblot Kit than of the Standard Lyme IgG Immunoblot Kit According to CDC Testing Criteria.

Authors:  Kamran Kadkhoda; Ainsley Gretchen
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Advances in Serodiagnostic Testing for Lyme Disease Are at Hand.

Authors:  John A Branda; Barbara A Body; Jeff Boyle; Bernard M Branson; Raymond J Dattwyler; Erol Fikrig; Noel J Gerald; Maria Gomes-Solecki; Martin Kintrup; Michel Ledizet; Andrew E Levin; Michael Lewinski; Lance A Liotta; Adriana Marques; Paul S Mead; Emmanuel F Mongodin; Segaran Pillai; Prasad Rao; William H Robinson; Kristian M Roth; Martin E Schriefer; Thomas Slezak; Jessica Snyder; Allen C Steere; Jan Witkowski; Susan J Wong; Steven E Schutzer
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 9.079

6.  Single-tier testing with the C6 peptide ELISA kit compared with two-tier testing for Lyme disease.

Authors:  Gary P Wormser; Martin Schriefer; Maria E Aguero-Rosenfeld; Andrew Levin; Allen C Steere; Robert B Nadelman; John Nowakowski; Adriana Marques; Barbara J B Johnson; J Stephen Dumler
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2012-10-11       Impact factor: 2.803

Review 7.  Laboratory Diagnosis of Lyme Borreliosis.

Authors:  John A Branda; Allen C Steere
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2021-01-27       Impact factor: 26.132

8.  Detection of Borrelia burgdorferi Cell-free DNA in Human Plasma Samples for Improved Diagnosis of Early Lyme Borreliosis.

Authors:  John A Branda; Jacob E Lemieux; Lily Blair; Asim A Ahmed; David K Hong; Sivan Bercovici; Timothy A Blauwkamp; Desiree Hollemon; Carine Ho; Klemen Strle; Nitin S Damle; Timothy J Lepore; Nira R Pollock
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2021-10-05       Impact factor: 20.999

9.  Updated CDC Recommendation for Serologic Diagnosis of Lyme Disease.

Authors:  Paul Mead; Jeannine Petersen; Alison Hinckley
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2019-08-16       Impact factor: 17.586

Review 10.  Current Guidelines, Common Clinical Pitfalls, and Future Directions for Laboratory Diagnosis of Lyme Disease, United States.

Authors:  Andrew Moore; Christina Nelson; Claudia Molins; Paul Mead; Martin Schriefer
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 6.883

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.