JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Engstrom, S. M.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, R. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Engstrom, S. M.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, R. C.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 02 1995, 419-427, Vol 33, No. 2
Copyright © 1995 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Immunoblot interpretation criteria for serodiagnosis of early Lyme disease

SM Engstrom, E Shoop and RC Johnson
Department of Microbiology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis.

We monitored the antibody responses of 55 treated patients with early Lyme disease and physician-documented erythema migrans. Six sequential serum samples were obtained from patients before, during, and until one year after antibiotic therapy and analyzed by in-house enzyme-linked immunosorbent (ELISA) and immunoblot assays. An immunoblot procedure utilizing a gradient gel and an image analysis system was developed. A relational database management system was used to analyze the results and provide criteria for early disease immunoblot interpretation. Recommended criteria for the immunoglobulin M (IgM) immunoblot are the recognition of two of three proteins (24, 39, and 41 kDa). The recommended criteria for a positive IgG immunoblot are the recognition of two of five proteins (20, 24 [> 19 intensity units], 35, 39, and 88 kDa). Alternatively, if band intensity cannot be measured, the 22-kDa protein can be substituted for the 24-kDa protein with only a small decrease in sensitivity. Monoclonal antibodies were used to identify all these proteins except the 35-kDa protein. With the proposed immunoblot interpretations, the sequential serum samples were examined. At visit 1, the day of diagnosis and initiation of treatment, 54.5% of the serum samples were either IgM or IgG positive. The peak antibody response, with 80% of the serum samples positive, occurred at visit 2, 8 to 12 days into treatment. The sensitivities of the IgM and IgG immunoblot for detecting patients that were seropositive into the study period were 58.5 and 54.6%, respectively, at visit 1 and 100% at visit 2. Twenty percent of the patients remained seronegative throughout the study. The specificities of the IgM and IgG immunoblots were 92 to 94% and 93 to 96%, respectively. The IgM immunoblot and ELISA were similar in sensitivities, whereas the IgG immunoblot had greater sensitivity than the IgG ELISA (P = 0.006).


This article has been cited by other articles:




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 1995 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.