Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Report Refuting Value of Immune Complexes To Diagnose Lyme Disease Is Invalid

Report Refuting Value of Immune Complexes To Diagnose Lyme Disease Is Invalid Lyme disease (LD) is difficult to diagnose absent hallmark clinical symptoms. LD immunoassays are problematic because of cross-reactivities, false-positives, sequestration of antibody and antigen in immune complexes (IC) early after infection, and persisting antibodies. Demonstration of IC in LD (10) opened the possibility of developing assays to detect immunoglobulin M (IgM) in IC at a time when antibiotic therapy would be useful. Subsequently, we confirmed the presence or absence of LD antigens/antibodies in sera and other biological fluids from putative LD patients (1-4). Assay development used "gold standard" erythema migrans and/or culture-positive (from biopsy) samples (e.g., CDC) and endemic area controls. We compared our enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and immunoblots with many types of commercial (e.g., MarDx) and laboratory (e.g., immunofluorescent antibody, enzyme immunoassays) tests. Using monoclonal antibodies (MAb), standard assay development protocols (antibody/antigen checkerboards to ascertain correct concentrations of primary and secondary antibodies), appropriate blocking reagents, and sensitive detection methods (e.g., biotin-avidin), we obtained superior sensitivity and specificity of IC over comparator tests (3, 4) or whole serum alone (corroborated in independent laboratories). IC allowed us to "see" more bands in immunoblots (2) than a comparator commercial test, and exhaustive absorption of IC along with a "good" MAb http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Clinical and Vaccine Immunology American Society For Microbiology

Report Refuting Value of Immune Complexes To Diagnose Lyme Disease Is Invalid

Report Refuting Value of Immune Complexes To Diagnose Lyme Disease Is Invalid

Clinical and Vaccine Immunology , Volume 13 (2): 304 – Feb 1, 2006

Abstract

Lyme disease (LD) is difficult to diagnose absent hallmark clinical symptoms. LD immunoassays are problematic because of cross-reactivities, false-positives, sequestration of antibody and antigen in immune complexes (IC) early after infection, and persisting antibodies. Demonstration of IC in LD (10) opened the possibility of developing assays to detect immunoglobulin M (IgM) in IC at a time when antibiotic therapy would be useful. Subsequently, we confirmed the presence or absence of LD antigens/antibodies in sera and other biological fluids from putative LD patients (1-4). Assay development used "gold standard" erythema migrans and/or culture-positive (from biopsy) samples (e.g., CDC) and endemic area controls. We compared our enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and immunoblots with many types of commercial (e.g., MarDx) and laboratory (e.g., immunofluorescent antibody, enzyme immunoassays) tests. Using monoclonal antibodies (MAb), standard assay development protocols (antibody/antigen checkerboards to ascertain correct concentrations of primary and secondary antibodies), appropriate blocking reagents, and sensitive detection methods (e.g., biotin-avidin), we obtained superior sensitivity and specificity of IC over comparator tests (3, 4) or whole serum alone (corroborated in independent laboratories). IC allowed us to "see" more bands in immunoblots (2) than a comparator commercial test, and exhaustive absorption of IC along with a "good" MAb

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-society-for-microbiology/report-refuting-value-of-immune-complexes-to-diagnose-lyme-disease-is-kjz0Shv38n

References (11)

Publisher
American Society For Microbiology
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 by the American Society For Microbiology.
ISSN
1556-6811
eISSN
1556-6811
DOI
10.1128/CVI.13.2.304-306.2006
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Lyme disease (LD) is difficult to diagnose absent hallmark clinical symptoms. LD immunoassays are problematic because of cross-reactivities, false-positives, sequestration of antibody and antigen in immune complexes (IC) early after infection, and persisting antibodies. Demonstration of IC in LD (10) opened the possibility of developing assays to detect immunoglobulin M (IgM) in IC at a time when antibiotic therapy would be useful. Subsequently, we confirmed the presence or absence of LD antigens/antibodies in sera and other biological fluids from putative LD patients (1-4). Assay development used "gold standard" erythema migrans and/or culture-positive (from biopsy) samples (e.g., CDC) and endemic area controls. We compared our enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and immunoblots with many types of commercial (e.g., MarDx) and laboratory (e.g., immunofluorescent antibody, enzyme immunoassays) tests. Using monoclonal antibodies (MAb), standard assay development protocols (antibody/antigen checkerboards to ascertain correct concentrations of primary and secondary antibodies), appropriate blocking reagents, and sensitive detection methods (e.g., biotin-avidin), we obtained superior sensitivity and specificity of IC over comparator tests (3, 4) or whole serum alone (corroborated in independent laboratories). IC allowed us to "see" more bands in immunoblots (2) than a comparator commercial test, and exhaustive absorption of IC along with a "good" MAb

Journal

Clinical and Vaccine ImmunologyAmerican Society For Microbiology

Published: Feb 1, 2006

There are no references for this article.