Lyme borreliosis is caused by a growing list of related, yet distinct, spirochetes with complex biology and sophisticated immune evasion mechanisms.

Background. Lyme disease (LD) antibody testing currently involves a 2-tiered algorithm with a whole-cell sonicate (WCS) enzyme immunoassay (EIA), followed by IgM/IgG Western immunoblots. A single EIA using the C6 peptide of the Borrelia burgdorferi variable-major protein-like sequence expressed lipoprotein provides similar or better sensitivity but less specificity, compared with standard 2-tiered testing. Here, we investigated an alternative 2-tiered strategy, in which the first step remained a WCS EIA, but immunoblotting was replaced by a C6 EIA.

The conventional 2-tiered serologic testing protocol for Lyme disease (LD), an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) followed by immunoglobulin M and immunoglobulin G Western blots, performs well in late-stage LD but is insensitive in patients with erythema migrans (EM), the most common manifestation of the illness. Western blots are also complex, difficult to interpret, and relatively expensive. In an effort to improve test performance and simplify testing in early LD, we evaluated several modified 2-tiered testing (MTTT) protocols, which use 2 assays designed as first-tier tests sequentially, without the need of Western blots. The MTTT protocols included (1) a whole-cell sonicate (WCS) EIA followed by a C6 EIA; (2) a WCS EIA followed by a VlsE chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA); and (3) a variable major protein-like sequence, expressed (VlsE) CLIA followed by a C6 EIA. Sensitivity was determined using serum from 55 patients with erythema migrans; specificity was determined using serum from 50 patients with other illnesses and 1227 healthy subjects. Sensitivity of the various MTTT protocols in patients with acute erythema migrans ranged from 36% (95% confidence interval [CI], 25%–50%) to 54% (95% CI, 42%–67%), compared with 25% (95% CI, 16%–38%) using the conventional protocol (P = .003–0.3). Among control subjects, the 3 MTTT protocols were similarly specific (99.3%–99.5%) compared with conventional 2-tiered testing (99.5% specificity; P = .6–1.0). Although there were minor differences in sensitivity and specificity among MTTT protocols, each provides comparable or greater sensitivity in acute EM, and similar specificity compared with conventional 2-tiered testing, obviating the need for Western blots.

BACKGROUND: Characterizing the humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2 and developing accurate serologic assays are needed for diagnostic purposes and estimating population-level seroprevalence. METHODS: We measured the kinetics of early antibody responses to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2 in a cohort of 259 symptomatic North American patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 (up to 75 days after symptom onset) compared to antibody levels in 1548 individuals whose blood samples were obtained prior to the pandemic. RESULTS: Between 14-28 days from onset of symptoms, IgG, IgA, or IgM antibody responses to RBD were all accurate in identifying recently infected individuals, with 100% specificity and a sensitivity of 97%, 91%, and 81% respectively. Although the estimated median time to becoming seropositive was similar across isotypes, IgA and IgM antibodies against RBD were short-lived with most individuals estimated to become seronegative again by 51 and 47 days after symptom onset, respectively. IgG antibodies against RBD lasted longer and persisted through 75 days post-symptoms. IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 RBD were highly correlated with neutralizing antibodies targeting the S protein. No cross-reactivity of the SARS-CoV-2 RBD-targeted antibodies was observed with several known circulating coronaviruses, HKU1, OC 229 E, OC43, and NL63. CONCLUSIONS: Among symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 cases, RBD-targeted antibodies can be indicative of previous and recent infection. IgG antibodies are correlated with neutralizing antibodies and are possibly a correlate of protective immunity.

Background. Standard 2-tiered immunoglobulin G (IgG) testing has performed well in late Lyme disease (LD), but IgM testing early in the illness has bee

Background. Physicians in the United States sometimes need to evaluate a patient for suspected Lyme borreliosis (LB) who may have acquired the infection in Europe. Using serum samples from European LB patients, we compared the performance of European and US serodiagnostic tests, including newer-generation assays containing Vmp-like sequence, expressed or its C6 peptide. Methods. The sensitivity of each assay was determined using 64 serum samples from LB patients with early or late disease manifestations who acquired the infection in Europe. Specificity was measured using 100 sera from healthy subjects from a nonendemic area. Results. For the detection of European-acquired infection, conventional 2-tiered testing (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA] followed by immunoblotting) using US assays had an overall sensitivity and specificity of 52% and 100%, compared with 81% (P = .0007) and 99% (P = 1.00) using analogous European tests. The sensitivity of a US C6 ELISA used as a stand-alone test (88% overall) was statistically comparable to that of conventional 2-tiered testing using European tests (P = .47) and was 100% specific. Similarly, an alternative 2-tiered algorithm using a standard US ELISA followed by a C6 ELISA was comparably sensitive (84% overall) compared with conventional 2-tiered testing using European assays (P = .82), and specificity remained 100%. Conclusions. European assays outperformed analogous US assays in a conventional 2-tiered testing algorithm. However, a C6 ELISA used as a stand-alone test or in the second tier of a 2-tiered algorithm performed comparably to conventional 2-tiered testing using European assays, and can be used for evaluation of any patient, regardless of travel history.