Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27558183›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2016

Lyme Borreliosis Serology: Performance of Several Commonly Used Laboratory Diagnostic Tests and a Large Resource Panel of Well-Characterized Patient Samples.

Claudia R Molins, Mark J Delorey, Christopher Sexton, Martin E Schriefer

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Laboratory Diagnosis of Lyme Borreliosis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Diagnostic parameters of modified two-tier testing in European patients with early Lyme disease.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Modified two-tiered testing algorithm for Lyme disease serology: the Canadian context.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2020
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Claudia R MolinsDivision of Vector-Borne Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
Mark J DeloreyDivision of Vector-Borne Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
Christopher SextonDivision of Vector-Borne Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA.
Martin E SchrieferDivision of Vector-Borne Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA mms7@cdc.gov.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current recommendation for the laboratory confirmation of Lyme disease is serology-based diagnostics. Specifically, a standardized two-tiered testing (STTT) algorithm is applied that utilizes a first-tier immunofluorescence assay or enzyme immunoassay (EIA) that, if the result is positive or equivocal, is followed by second-tier immunoblotting. Despite the standardization and performance achievements, STTT is considered technically complex and subjective, as well as insensitive for early acute infection. These issues have prompted development of novel algorithms and testing platforms. In this study, we evaluated the performance of several commonly used assays for STTT. Several modified two-tiered testing (MTTT) algorithms, including a 2-EIA algorithm and modified criteria for second-tier IgG immunoblots, were also evaluated. All tests were performed on sera from a recently available, well-defined archive of positive- and negative-control patients. Our study demonstrates differences in the results between individual first- and second-tier tests, although the overall agreement of the different STTT algorithms used was strong. In addition, the MTTT algorithm utilizing 2-EIAs was found to be equivalent to all STTT algorithms tested, with agreement ranging from 94 to 97%. The 2-EIA MTTT algorithm slightly enhanced sensitivity in early disease compared to the STTT algorithms evaluated. Furthermore, these data add to the mounting evidence that a 2-EIA-based MTTT algorithm, where immunoblotting is replaced by the C6 EIA, performs as well or better than STTT.

Indexed as

Reference StandardsDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHumansLyme DiseaseN-AcetylglucosaminyltransferasesSensitivity and SpecificitySerologic TestsLARGE1 protein, humanN-Acetylglucosaminyltransferases

Identifiers

PMID27558183
PMCPMC5078550
OpenAlexW2516738265

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.