Persistent Anti-Borrelia IgM Antibodies without Lyme Borreliosis in the Clinical and Immunological Context

Evaluation of different standard and modified two-tier testing strategies for the laboratory diagnosis of lyme borreliosis in a European setting

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis (LB) relies on clinical symptoms and detection of Borrelia-specific antibodies. Guidelines recommend a two-tier testing (TTT) strategy for disseminated LB: serological screening with a sensitive enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and confirmation with a specific immunoblot. Searching for the most sensitive and specific approach, this retrospective study evaluated standard (STTT) and modified (MTTT) strategies using a well-defined study population.

METHODS

Cases included patients with active Lyme neuroborreliosis (LNB; n = 29) or Lyme arthritis (LA; n = 17). Controls comprised patients treated for LNB (n = 36) or LA (n = 8), healthy individuals who were either untreated (n = 75) or treated for LB (n = 15) in the past, and patients with potentially cross-reactive diseases (n = 16). Sera were subjected to three EIAs and two immunoblots. Reactive screening results were confirmed by immunoblot (STTT) or EIA (MTTT). Solitary IgM results in the screening assay and effects of antibiotic treatment on isotype-specific seropositivity rates were also assessed.

RESULTS

Sensitivities of STTT strategies ranged from 90%-97% for LNB and were 100% for LA. MTTT strategies were 100% sensitive. Specificities ranged from 89%-95% for STTT and from 88%-93% for MTTT strategies. Differences between STTT and MTTT strategies were not statistically significant. Solitary IgM reactivity was common among controls. Antibiotic treatment significantly reduced IgM/IgG positivity for LNB patients; for LA patients, a decline was only observed for IgM.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, MTTT strategies showed a slightly higher sensitivity and similar specificity compared to STTT strategies. Since EIAs are more time- and cost-efficient, MTTT strategies seem more favorable for clinical use. IgG testing enhances specificity with minimal sensitivity loss.

In silico epitope prediction of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato antigens for the detection of specific antibodies

Despite many years of research, serodiagnosis of Lyme disease still faces many obstacles. Difficulties arise mainly due to the low degree of amino acid sequence conservation of the most immunogenic antigens among B. burgdorferi s.l. genospecies, as well as differences in protein production depending on the environment in which the spirochete is located. Mapping B-cell epitopes located on antigens allows for a better understanding of antibody-pathogen interactions which is essential for the development of new and more effective diagnostic tools. In this study, in silico B-cell epitope mapping was performed to determine the theoretical diagnostic potential of selected B. burgdorferi s.l. proteins (BB0108, BB0126, BB0298, BB0689, BB0323, FliL, PstS, SecD, EF-Tu). Bioinformatics software predicted 35 conserved linear and 31 conformational epitopes with the degree of identity among B. burgdorferi s.l. of at least 85%, which may prove to be useful in the development of a new tool for the diagnosis of Lyme disease.

Antibody Cross-Reactivity in Serodiagnosis of Lyme Disease

Lyme disease is a tick-borne disease caused by spirochetes belonging to the Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato complex. The disease is characterized by a varied course; therefore, the basis for diagnosis is laboratory methods. Currently, a two-tiered serological test is recommended, using an ELISA as a screening test and a Western blot as a confirmatory test. This approach was introduced due to the relatively high number of false-positive results obtained when using an ELISA alone. However, even this approach has not entirely solved the problem of false-positive results caused by cross-reactive antibodies. Many highly immunogenic B. burgdorferi s.l. proteins are recognized nonspecifically by antibodies directed against other pathogens. This also applies to antigens, such as OspC, BmpA, VlsE, and FlaB, i.e., those commonly used in serodiagnostic assays. Cross-reactions can be caused by both bacterial (relapsing fever Borrelia, Treponema pallidum) and viral (Epstein-Baar virus, Cytomegalovirus) infections. Additionally, a rheumatoid factor has also been shown to nonspecifically recognize B. burgdorferi s.l. proteins, resulting in false-positive results. Therefore, it is necessary to carefully interpret the results of serodiagnostic tests so as to avoid overdiagnosis of Lyme disease, which causes unnecessary implementations of strong antibiotic therapies and delays in the correct diagnosis.

Classical Borrelia Serology Does Not Aid in the Diagnosis of Persistent Symptoms Attributed to Lyme Borreliosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis is based on two-tier testing using an ELISA and Western blot. About 5-10% of patients report persistent symptoms of unknown etiology after treatment, resulting in substantial difficulties in further diagnostic workup. This paper presents a study aimed at determining whether serology can differentiate between patients with persistent symptoms attributed to Lyme and other patients with Lyme borreliosis.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study included 162 samples from four subgroups: patients with persistent symptoms of Lyme (PSL), early Lyme borreliosis with erythema migrans (EM), patients tested in a general practitioner setting (GP), and healthy controls (HC). ELISA, Western blots, and multiplex assays from different manufacturers were used to determine inter-test variations in PSL and to compare reactivity against Borrelia-specific antigens among the groups.

RESULTS

In comparing the IgG and IgM reactivity by Western blot, IgG was more often positive in the PSL group than in the GP group. The individual antigen reactivity was similar between the PSL and EM or GP groups. Inter-test agreement among the manufacturers was variable, and agreement was higher for IgG testing compared to IgM.

CONCLUSIONS

Serological testing is unable to define the subgroup of patients with persistent symptoms attributed to Lyme borreliosis. Additionally, the current two-tier testing protocol shows a large variance among different manufacturers in these patients.

Seroprevalence and Risk Factors of Lyme Borreliosis in The Netherlands: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study

Lyme borreliosis (LB) is not notifiable in many European countries, and accurate data on the incidence are often lacking. This study aimed to determine the seroprevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (s.l.)-specific antibodies in the general population of The Netherlands, and to determine risk factors associated with seropositivity. Sera and questionnaires were obtained from participants (n = 5592, aged 0-88 years) enrolled in a nationwide serosurveillance study. The sera were tested for B. burgdorferi s.l.-specific IgM and IgG antibodies using ELISA and immunoblot. Seroprevalence was estimated controlling for the survey design. Risk factors for seropositivity were analyzed using a generalized linear mixed-effect model. In 2016/2017, the seroprevalence in The Netherlands was 4.4% (95% CI 3.5-5.2). Estimates were higher in men (5.7% [95% CI 4.4-7.2]) than in women (3.1% [95% CI 2.0-4.0]), and increased with age from 2.6% (95% CI 1.4-4.4) in children to 7.7% (95% CI 5.9-7.9) in 60- to 88-year-olds. The seroprevalence for B. burgdorferi s.l. in the general population in The Netherlands was comparable to rates reported in European countries. The main risk factors for seropositivity were increasing age, being male and the tick bite frequency. The dynamics of LB infection are complex and involve variables from various disciplines. This could be further elucidated using infectious disease modelling.