Wormser Gary P, Levin Andrew, Soman Sandeep, Adenikinju Omosalewa, Longo Michael V, Branda John A
Division of Infectious Diseases, New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Dec;51(12):4045-9. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01853-13. Epub 2013 Sep 25.
The mainstay of laboratory diagnosis for Lyme disease is two-tiered serological testing, in which a reactive first-tier enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) or an immunofluorescence assay is supplemented by separate IgM and IgG immunoblots. Recent data suggest that the C6 ELISA can be substituted for immunoblots without a reduction in either sensitivity or specificity. In this study, the costs of 4 different two-tiered testing strategies for Lyme disease were compared using the median charges for these tests at 6 commercial diagnostic laboratories in 2012. The study found that a whole-cell sonicate ELISA followed by the C6 ELISA was the most cost-effective two-tiered testing strategy for Lyme disease with acute-phase serum samples. We conclude that the C6 ELISA can substitute for immunoblots in the two-tiered testing protocol for Lyme disease without a loss of sensitivity or specificity and is less expensive.
莱姆病实验室诊断的主要方法是两层血清学检测,即先用反应性的一级酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)或免疫荧光测定,再分别进行IgM和IgG免疫印迹检测。最新数据表明,C6 ELISA可替代免疫印迹检测,且不会降低敏感性或特异性。在本研究中,利用2012年6家商业诊断实验室这些检测的中位数费用,比较了4种不同的莱姆病两层检测策略的成本。研究发现,对于急性期血清样本,全细胞超声裂解物ELISA随后进行C6 ELISA是莱姆病最具成本效益的两层检测策略。我们得出结论,C6 ELISA可在莱姆病两层检测方案中替代免疫印迹检测,且不会损失敏感性或特异性,并成本更低。