4.6 Article

Immunoreactivity of Polish Lyme Disease Patient Sera to Specific Borrelia Antigens-Part 1

Journal

DIAGNOSTICS
Volume 11, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11112157

Keywords

Lyme disease; immunoreactivity; ELISA; immunoblot; Borrelia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study investigated the immunoreactivity of LD patient sera to Borrelia antigens using an ELISA-IB assay combination. More positive results were obtained in the IgM class in the ELISA assay, while positive results dominated in the IgG class in the IB assay. Positive results in the IB assay most often showed IgM antibodies against specific antigens like OspC and flagellin, and IgG antibodies against antigens like VlsE, BmpA, OspC, p41, and p83.
The diverse clinical picture and the non-specificity of symptoms in Lyme disease (LD) require the implementation of effective diagnostics, which should take into account the heterogeneity of Borrelia antigens. According to available guidelines, laboratories should use a two-tier serological diagnosis based on the enzyme-linked immunosorbent (ELISA) screening test and confirmation of the immunoblot (IB). The aim of the study was to investigate the immunoreactivity of LD patient sera to Borrelia antigens and to attempt to identify the genospecies responsible for LD using an ELISA-IB assay combination. Eighty patients with suspected LD and 22 healthy people participated in the study. All samples were tested with ELISA and IB assays in both IgM and IgG antibodies. In the case of the ELISA assay, more positive results were obtained in the IgM class than in the IgG class. In the case of the IB assay, positive results dominated in the IgG class. Positive results obtained in the IB assay most often showed IgM antibodies against the OspC and flagellin antigens, whereas the IgG antibodies were against VlsE, BmpA, OspC, p41, and p83 antigens. The IB assay is an important part of LD serodiagnosis and should be mandatory in diagnostic laboratories.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available