Search

Contains fulltext : 286839.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: Cellular tests for Lyme borreliosis might be able to overcome major shortcomings of serological testing, such as its low sensitivity in early stages of infection. Therefore, we aimed to assess the sensitivity and specificity of three cellular tests. METHODS: This was a nationwide, prospective, multiple-gate case-control study done in the Netherlands. Patients with physician-confirmed Lyme borreliosis, either early localised or disseminated, were consecutively included as cases at the start of antibiotic treatment. Controls were those without Lyme borreliosis from the general population (healthy controls) and those with potentially cross-reactive conditions (eg, autoimmune disease). We used three cellular tests for Lyme borreliosis (Spirofind Revised, iSpot Lyme, and LTT-MELISA) as index tests, and standard two-tier serological testing (STTT) as a comparator. Clinical data from Lyme borreliosis patients were collected at baseline and at 12 weeks after inclusion, and blood samples were obtained at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. Control participants underwent clinical and laboratory assessments at baseline only. FINDINGS: Cases comprised 271 patients with Lyme borreliosis (of whom 245 had early-localised Lyme borreliosis and 26 had disseminated disease) and controls comprised 228 participants without Lyme borreliosis from the general population and 41 participants with potentially cross-reactive conditions. Recruitment occurred between May 14, 2018, and March 16, 2020. The specificity of STTT in healthy controls (216 of 228 samples [94·7%, 95% CI 91·5-97·7]) was higher than that of the cellular tests: Spirofind (140 of 171 [81·9%, 76·1-87·2]), iSpot Lyme (32 of 103 [31·1%, 21·5-40·3]) and LTT-MELISA (100 of 190 [52·6%, 44·9-60·3]). Cellular tests had varying sensitivities: Spirofind (88 of 204 [43·1%, 36·4-50·4]), iSpot Lyme (51 of 94 [54·3%, 44·5-63·7]), and LTT-MELISA (66 of 218 [30·3%, 23·8-36·7]). The Spirofind and iSpot Lyme outperformed STTT for sensitivity, but were similar to the C6-ELISA (C6-ELISA: 135 of 270 [50·0%, 44·5-55·5]; STTT: 76 of 270 [28·1%, 23·0-33·6]). INTERPRETATION: The cellular tests for Lyme borreliosis used in this study have a low specificity compared with serological tests, which leads to a high number of false-positive test results. We conclude that these cellular tests are unfit for clinical use at this stage. FUNDING: Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, AMC Foundation (Amsterdam UMC), and Ministry of Health of the Netherlands.

This retrospective case-control study assesses the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the ZEUS Borrelia VlsE1/pepC10 assay in comparison with the C6-ELISA in European patients with Lyme borreliosis, healthy blood donors, and potentially cross-reactive controls. We included a convenience series of 161 sera from patients with physician-confirmed early localized or disseminated Lyme borreliosis (n = 143), 400 sera from healthy blood donors and 44 sera with potentially cross-reactive antibodies, on which we performed the aforementioned serological assays and the recomLine immunoblot. Diagnostic parameters were compared in various single-tier and two-tier algorithms. The specificities of the C6-ELISA and the ZEUS Borrelia VlsE1/pepC10 were comparable in healthy blood donors (e.g., single-tier permissive: C6: 362/400, 90.5% [87.2–93.2]; VlsE1/pepC10: 361/400, 90.3% [86.9–93.0]). The C6-ELISA had an apparently higher sensitivity in EM sera (e.g., both time points combined: C6: 61/76, 80.3% [69.5–88.5]; VlsE1/pepC10: 54/76, 71.1% [59.5–80.9]), but these differences were all not-significant. Interestingly, the VlsE1/pepC10 assay had a significantly higher specificity in sera with potentially cross-reactive antibodies (e.g., single-tier permissive: C6: 34/44, 77.3% [62.2–88.5]; VlsE1/pepC10: 40/44, 90.9% [78.3–97.5]; p = 0.031). While the areas under the curve for both assays were excellent, that of the C6-ELISA exceeded that of the VlsE1/pepC10 (C6: AUC = 0.925; VlsE1/pepC10: AUC = 0.878; p = 0.003). The novel ZEUS Borrelia VlsE1/pepC10 assay has generally comparable diagnostic parameters to the C6-ELISA with potentially improved specificity in cross-reactive sera. Thus, it is a useful tool for the serodiagnosis of Lyme borreliosis in Europe.

Summary: Background: Concerns about long-lasting symptoms attributed to Lyme borreliosis (LB) are widespread in the Western world, while such symptoms are highly prevalent in the general population. Methods: In the largest prospective study to date, adults with physician-confirmed LB were included at the start of antibiotic treatment. Primary outcomes, prevalence of persistent symptoms and symptom severity, were assessed using three-monthly standardised questionnaires during one year. Persistent symptoms were defined as impaired scores for fatigue (CIS, subscale fatigue), cognitive impairment (CFQ) or pain (SF-36, subscale bodily pain) ≥6 months, with onset

Serodiagnosis of Lyme borreliosis (LB) comes with several drawbacks, among which is limited sensitivity in early disease. This study assesses the sensitivity and specificity of the novel BioPlex 2200 Lyme IgG and Lyme IgM assays. It also assesses potential improvements to the assays through receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The BioPlex assays were performed on sera of 158 Dutch patients with physician-confirmed LB (both early localized and disseminated), 800 healthy blood donors from the Netherlands, and 90 cross-reactive controls. The BioPlex (Biopl) assays were compared with two commercial enzyme immunoassays (Euroimmun [Eur]/C6-ELISA) and one immunoblot (recomLine). The highest sensitivity in early LB was achieved with the BioPlex assays, which outperformed the Euroimmun and C6-ELISA (Biopl: 81/88, 92.1%; Eur: 64/88, 72.7%; C6: 72/88, 81.8%). Sensitivity of all assays was comparable in patients with disseminated LB. The BioPlex assays were outperformed in terms of specificity (all healthy blood donors, Biopl: 571/800, 71.4%; Eur: 711/800, 88.9%; C6: 727/800, 90.9%), but further analyses showed promising avenues following cutoff optimization. ROC analysis showed that 2/6 antigens of the combined BioPlex IgG and IgM assays had significantly higher areas under the curve (AUCs) than those of the other analyses. Potential modified versions of the assays based on these antigens largely outperformed the Euroimmun and C6-ELISA in EM patients (Biopl: 81/80, 92.1%) while maintaining a comparable or even higher specificity (Biopl: 714/800, 89.3%). The BioPlex 2200 Lyme IgG and Lyme IgM assays are promising tools for the serodiagnosis of early LB, with the potential to be used as a standalone test. Further research is necessary to validate the findings of this discovery cohort.

Background After antibiotic treatment of Lyme borreliosis, a subset of patients report persistent symptoms, also referred to as post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome. The reported prevalence of persistent symptoms varies considerably, and its pathophysiology is under debate. The LymeProspect study has been designed to investigate the prevalence, severity, and a wide range of hypotheses on the etiology of persistent symptoms among patients treated for Lyme borreliosis in the Netherlands. Methods LymeProspect is a prospective, observational cohort study among adults with proven or probable Lyme borreliosis, either erythema migrans or disseminated manifestations, included at the start of antibiotic treatment. During one year of follow-up, participants are subjected to questionnaires every three months and blood is collected repeatedly during the first three months. The primary outcome is the prevalence of persistent symptoms after treatment, assessed by questionnaires online focusing on fatigue (CIS, subscale fatigue severity), pain (SF-36, subscale pain) and neurocognitive dysfunction (CFQ). Potential microbiological, immunological, genetic, epidemiological and cognitive-behavioral determinants for persistent symptoms are secondary outcome measures. Control cohorts include patients with long-lasting symptoms and unconfirmed Lyme disease, population controls, and subjects having reported a tick bite not followed by Lyme borreliosis. Discussion This article describes the background and design of the LymeProspect study protocol. This study is characterized by a prospective, explorative and multifaceted design. The results of this study will provide insights into the prevalence and determinants of persistent symptoms after treatment for Lyme borreliosis, and may provide a rationale for preventive and treatment recommendations. Trial registration NTR4998 (Netherlands Trial Register). Date of registration: 13 February 2015. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12879-019-3949-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background The pineal hormone melatonin regulates circadian rhythms, largely by feedback on the central biological clock of the brain, the hypothalamic suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN). This feedback is mediated by the melatonin receptors, melatonin receptor 1 (MT1) and melatonin receptor 2 (MT2). The circadian system may play a role in the pathophysiology of mood disorders, and indeed, melatonin-receptor agonists are considered a potential therapy for depression. Method In order to investigate melatonin receptors in the SCN during depression, and their relationship to the major neuropeptides in the SCN, vasopressin (AVP) and vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP), we studied the SCN in 14 depressed patients (five major depression and nine bipolar disorder) and 14 matched controls by immunocytochemistry. Results We show here that hypothalamic MT2 receptor immunoreactivity was limited to SCN, the supraoptic nucleus and paraventricular nucleus. We found that numbers of MT1-immunoreactive (MT1-ir) cells and AVP and/or VIP-ir cells were increased in the central SCN in depression, but numbers of MT2-ir cells were not altered. Moreover, the number of MT1-ir cells, but not MT2-ir cells was negatively correlated with age at onset of depression, while positively correlated with disease duration. Conclusion and limitations Although every post-mortem study has limitations, MT1 receptors appeared specifically increased in the SCN of depressed patients, and may increase during the course of the disease. These changes may be involved in the circadian disorders and contribute to the efficacy of MT agonists or melatonin in depression. Moreover, we suggest that melatonin receptor agonists for depression should be targeted towards the MT1 receptor selectively.