Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
proteins to improve our microfluidic assay (mChip-Ld). We then evaluated its serodiagnostic performance in comparison to that of a first-tier enzyme immunoassay and the STT algorithm. We observed that more antigens became positive as Lyme disease progressed from early to late stages. We selected three antigens (3Ag) to include in the mChip-Ld: VlsE and a proprietary synthetic 33-mer peptide (PepVF) to capture sensitivity in all disease stages and OspC for early Lyme disease. With the specificity set at 95%, the sensitivity of the mChip-Ld with 3Ag ranged from 80% (95% confidence interval [CI], 56% to 94%) and 85% (95% CI, 74% to 96%) for two panels of serum from patients with early Lyme disease and was 100% (95% CI, 83% to 100%) for serum from patients with Lyme arthritis; the STT algorithm detected early Lyme disease in the same two panels of serum from patients with early Lyme disease with a sensitivity of 48.5% and 75% and Lyme arthritis in serum from patients with Lyme arthritis with a sensitivity of 100%, and the specificity was 97.5% to 100%. The mChip-Ld platform outperformed the STT algorithm according to sensitivity. These results open the door for the development of a single, rapid, multiplexed diagnostic test for point-of-care use that can be designed to identify the Lyme disease stage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arumugam et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: