Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The positive predictive value of Borrelia burgdorferi serology in the light of symptoms of patients sent to an outpatient service for tick-borne diseases

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Inflammation Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

By using the published incidence of Lyme borreliosis in endemic regions of the World, and the sensitivity and specificity data of the best Lyme serological tests, we computed the positive predictive value of Borrelia burgdorferi antibody testing.

Methods

The calculation of predictive value was based on Bayes’ theorem. We also analyzed the frequency distribution of the specific and non-specific symptoms and complaints of 27,194 patients sent to the Centre for Tick-borne Diseases in Budapest from 1986 to 2008.

Results

This evaluation demonstrated that practitioners often use Lyme serology in a “trial and error” way, without any reasonable ground. According to our calculation the positive predictive value of the best Lyme antibody tests if applied in this way is <9.1%.

Conclusion

Our study suggests that the present practice of applying Lyme serological tests may result in more harm than benefit.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ACA:

Acrodermatitis chronica atrophicans

BL:

Borrelia lymphocytoma

ELISA:

Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay

EM:

Erythema migrans

Lb:

Lyme borreliosis

LMR:

Lymphocytic meningoradiculitis

TIBOLA:

Tick-borne lymphadenopathy

References

  1. Binnicker MJ, Jespersen DJ, Harring JA, Rollins LO, Bryant SC, Beito EM. Evaluation of two commercial systems for automated processing, reading, and interpretation of Lyme borreliosis Western blots. J Clin Microbiol. 2008;46:2216–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tugwell P, Dennis DT, Weinstein A, Wells G, Shea B, Nichol G, et al. Laboratory evaluation in the diagnosis of Lyme disease. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:1109–23.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Centers for Disease Control, Prevention—CDC. Lyme disease—United States, 2003–2005. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2007;56:573–6.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bacon RM, Biggerstaff BJ, Schriefer ME, Gilmore RD, Philipp MT, Steere AC, et al. Serodiagnosis of Lyme disease by kinetic enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using recombinant VlsE1 or peptide antigens of Borrelia burgdorferi compared with 2-tiered testing using whole-cell lysates. J Infect Dis. 2003;187:1187–99.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Robertson J, Guy E, Andrews N, Wilske B, Anda P, Granström M, et al. A European multicenter study of immunoblotting in serodiagnosis of Lyme borreliosis. J Clin Microbiol. 2000;38:2097–102.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Steere AC, McHugh G, Damle N, Sikand VK. Prospective study of serologic tests for lyme disease. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;47:188–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Smith R, Takkinen J. (Eurosurveillance editorial office) Lyme borreliosis: Europe-wide coordinated surveillance and action needed? Eur Surveill. 2006; 11: 6. http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ew/2006/060622.asp. Accessed 5 July 2009.

  8. WHO. The vector-borne human infections in Europe. Their distribution and burden on public health. 2004. http://www.euro.who.int/document/e82481.pdf. Accessed 12 Jan 2008.

  9. Spiegelhalter DJ, Abrams KR, Myles JP. Bayesian approaches to clinical trials and health care evaluation. Chichester: Wiley; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Carrier M, Wells PS, Rodger MA. Excluding pulmonary embolism at the bedside with low pre-test probability and D-dimer: safety and clinical utility of 4 methods to assign pre-test probability. Thromb Res. 2006;117:469–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Khairy P. Programmed ventricular stimulation for risk stratification in patients with tetralogy of Fallot: a Bayesian perspective. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 2007;4:292–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Van Woerden HC, Howard A, Lyons M, Westmoreland D, Thomas M. Use of pre- and post-test probability of disease to interpret meningococcal PCR results. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2004;23:658–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lakos A. Tick-borne lymphadenopathy—a new rickettsial disease? Lancet. 1997;350:1006.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Steere AC, Sikand VK, Schoen RT, Nowakowski J. Asymptomatic infection with Borrelia burgdorferi. J Clin Infect Dis. 2003;37:528–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. European Union Concerted Action on Lyme borreliosis (EUCALB). http://meduni09.edis.at/eucalb/cms/index.php?searchword=60-80%25&option=com_search&Itemid=5. Accessed 3 July 2009.

  16. Steere AC. Lyme disease. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:115–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Liang FT, Steere AC, Marques AR, Johnson BJ, Miller JN, Philipp MT. Sensitive and specific serodiagnosis of Lyme disease by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay with a peptide based on an immunodominant conserved region of Borrelia burgdorferi VlsE. J Clin Microbiol. 1999;37:3990–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Aguero-Rosenfeld ME, Wang G, Schwartz I, Wormser GP. Diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2005;18:484–509.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lakos A. Lyme borreliosis in Hungary—epidemiological analysis of 1175 cases. Report of WHO workshop on Lyme borreliosis diagnosis and surveillance. Warsaw, June 1995. WHO/CDS/VPH/95. 1995; 141: 84–102.

  20. Berglund J, Eitrem R, Ornstein K, Lindberg A, Ringér A, Elmrud H, et al. An epidemiologic study of Lyme disease in southern Sweden. N Engl J Med. 1995;333:1319–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Immunetics. Laboratory management of Lyme disease using a C6 peptide based ELISA assay. November 2, 2008. Package Insert.

  22. Weinstein A. Editorial commentary: laboratory testing for Lyme disease: time for a change? Clin Infect Dis. 2008;47:196–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cizman M, Avsic-Zupanc T, Petrovec M, Ruzic-Sabljic E, Pokorn M. Seroprevalence of ehrlichiosis, Lyme borreliosis and tick-borne encephalitis infections in children and young adults in Slovenia. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2000;112:842–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Pierer K, Köck T, Freidl W, Stünzner D, Pierer G, Marth E, et al. Prevalence of antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi flagellin in Styrian blood donors. Zentralbl Bakteriol. 1993;279:239–43.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Strine TW, Hootman JM. US national prevalence and correlates of low back and neck pain among adults. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57:656–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Helmick CG, Felson DT, Lawrence RC, Gabriel S, Hirsch R, Kwoh CK, et al. National Arthritis Data Workgroup. Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58:15–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lawrence RC, Felson DT, Helmick CG, Arnold LM, Choi H, Deyo RA, et al. National Arthritis Data Workgroup. Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58:26–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lakos A. Comparison of four serological tests for Borrelia burgdorferi in Bell’s palsy. Serod Immunother. 1990;4:271–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Brown SL, Hansen SL, Langone JJ. Role of serology in the diagnosis of Lyme disease. JAMA. 1999;282:62–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Yudkowsky ES. An intuitive explanation of Bayes’ theorem. http://yudkowsky.net/rational/bayes. Accessed 20 Dec 2009.

  31. Casscells W, Schoenberger A, Graboys TB. Interpretation by physicians of clinical laboratory results. N Engl J Med. 1978;299:999–1001.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The study has not been supported financially by any source.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Centre for Tick-Borne Diseases, Visegrádi 14, Budapest, 1132, Hungary

    András Lakos

  2. Faculty of Veterinary Science, Szent István University, Budapest, Hungary

    Jenő Reiczigel

  3. Adaptation to Climate Change Research Group, Hungarian Academy of Sciences-Corvinus University, Budapest, Hungary

    Norbert Solymosi

Authors
  1. András Lakos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jenő Reiczigel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Norbert Solymosi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to András Lakos.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Andras Falus.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lakos, A., Reiczigel, J. & Solymosi, N. The positive predictive value of Borrelia burgdorferi serology in the light of symptoms of patients sent to an outpatient service for tick-borne diseases. Inflamm. Res. 59, 959–964 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00011-010-0209-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00011-010-0209-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation