This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (57)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related articles  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Bacterial Infections  • Pathology & Laboratory Medicine  • Diagnosis  • Alert me on articles by topic

S. Lori Brown, PhD, MPH; Sharon L. Hansen, PhD; John J. Langone, PhD

JAMA. 1999;282:62-66.

Numerous concerns regarding the potential for misdiagnosis of Lyme disease using commercial assays have been voiced by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). We attempted to clarify the clinical value of serologic testing for Lyme disease using the results of commonly marketed assays for detecting antibody toBorrelia burgdorferi, the organism that causes Lyme disease. We reviewed published studies on B burgdorferi test performance published through 1998, package insert labeling from FDA-cleared test kits for B burgdorferi, and Lyme Disease Survey Set LY-A from the College of American Pathologists. We assessed the sensitivity and specificity of commercial serologic tests (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA], immunofluorescence antibody [IFA], and immunodot) for diagnosis of Lyme disease. To reduce this risk of misdiagnosis, it is important that clinicians understand the performance characteristics and limitations of these tests. These tests, in common use in clinical or commercial laboratories, should be used only to support a clinical diagnosis of Lyme disease, not as the primary basis for making diagnostic or treatment decisions. Serologic testing is not useful early in the course of Lyme disease because of the low sensitivity of tests in early disease. Serologic testing may be more useful in later disease, at which time sensitivity and specificity of the test are improved. Positive or equivocal results on an ELISA, IFA, or immunodot assay requires supplemental testing with a Western blot assay. A negative result on the Western blot or ELISA indicates that there is no serologic evidence of infection by B burgdorferi at the time the sample was drawn.

Author Affiliations: Office of Surveillance and Biometrics, Division of Postmarket Surveillance (Dr Brown), Office of Device Evaluation, Division of Clinical Laboratory Devices (Dr Hansen), and Office of Science and Technology, Division of Life Sciences (Dr Langone), Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Rockville, Md.

RELATED ARTICLES

Lyme Disease Serology: Problems and Opportunities
Gary P. Wormser, Maria E. Aguero-Rosenfeld, and Robert B. Nadelman
JAMA. 1999;282(1):79-80.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

July 7, 1999
JAMA. 1999;282(1):99-100.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Antigenicity of borrelial protein BBK32 fragments in early Lyme borreliosis.
Lahdenne et al.
J Med Microbiol 2006;55:1499-1504.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Coinfections Acquired from Ixodes Ticks
Swanson et al.
Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2006;19:708-727.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Identification of Borrelia burgdorferi Ribosomal Protein L25 by the Phage Surface Display Method and Evaluation of the Protein's Value for Serodiagnosis.
Mueller et al.
J. Clin. Microbiol. 2006;44:3778-3780.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Author's response to comments by Sigal and Hassett, Phillips et al., and Shapiro et al.
Cairns
Int J Epidemiol 2005;34:1440-1443.
FULL TEXT  

Response to meta-analysis of Lyme borreliosis symptoms
Shapiro et al.
Int J Epidemiol 2005;34:1437-1439.
FULL TEXT  

Diagnosis of Lyme Borreliosis
Aguero-Rosenfeld et al.
Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2005;18:484-509.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Lyme disease and optic neuritis: Long-term follow-up of seropositive patients
Stricker et al.
Neurology 2003;61:1162-1163.
FULL TEXT  

Comparison of the Borrelia DotBlot G, MarDx, and VIDAS Enzyme Immunoassays for Detecting Immunoglobulin G Antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi in Human Serum
Jespersen et al.
J. Clin. Microbiol. 2002;40:4782-4784.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Recombinant OspC from Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto, B. afzelii and B. garinii in the serodiagnosis of Lyme borreliosis
PANELIUS et al.
J Med Microbiol 2002;51:731-739.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Laboratory Testing for Lyme Disease: Possibilities and Practicalities
Reed
J. Clin. Microbiol. 2002;40:319-324.
FULL TEXT  

Species-Specific Serodiagnosis of Lyme Arthritis and Neuroborreliosis Due to Borrelia burgdorferi Sensu Stricto, B. afzelii, and B. garinii by Using Decorin Binding Protein A
Heikkila et al.
J. Clin. Microbiol. 2002;40:453-460.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Recombinant Flagellin A Proteins from Borrelia burgdorferi Sensu Stricto, B. afzelii, and B. garinii in Serodiagnosis of Lyme Borreliosis
Panelius et al.
J. Clin. Microbiol. 2001;39:4013-4019.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Identifying Diagnostic Peptides for Lyme Disease through Epitope Discovery
Kouzmitcheva et al.
CVI 2001;8:150-160.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A European Multicenter Study of Immunoblotting in Serodiagnosis of Lyme Borreliosis
Robertson et al.
J. Clin. Microbiol. 2000;38:2097-2102.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Lyme borreliosis in Ontario: determining the risks
CMAJ 2000;162:1573-1574.
 

Borrelia burgdorferi B31 Erp Proteins That Are Dominant Immunoblot Antigens of Animals Infected with Isolate B31 Are Recognized by Only a Subset of Human Lyme Disease Patient Sera
Miller et al.
J. Clin. Microbiol. 2000;38:1569-1574.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Long-term Outcomes and Management of Patients With Lyme Disease
Gardner
JAMA 2000;283:658-659.
FULL TEXT  

Human Antibody Responses to VlsE Antigenic Variation Protein of Borrelia burgdorferi
Lawrenz et al.
J. Clin. Microbiol. 1999;37:3997-4004.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Lyme Disease Serology: Problems and Opportunities
Wormser et al.
JAMA 1999;282:79-80.
FULL TEXT