A biochip-based combined immunoassay for detection of serological status of Borrelia burgdorferi in Lyme borreliosis

Huang, Na-Li; Ye, Lei; Lv, Hui; Du, Yang; Schneider, Marion; Фан, Ли; Du, Wei‐Dong

doi:10.1016/j.cca.2017.06.024

Cited by 11 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The incubation time of CLIA‐L assay is much shorter, 30 min for preparation and 20 min for incubation. However, from the actual individual case expense point of view, this biochip format showed more advantages with lower cost and handling convenience than ELISA and CLIA‐L. Although in this study we only used a smaller panel of clinical samples to test feasibility of the biochip format, the results reasonably revealed that the biochip might manifest a potential application prospect as one of the substitutions of the conventional methods (IFA or ELISA) in the future.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

S‐S‐PEG‐COOH Self‐Assembled Monolayer on Gold Surface Enabled a Combined Assay for Serological EBV Antibody Isotypes

Liu

et al. 2018

Proteomics Clinical Apps

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is a ubiquitous human gamma herpes virus that infects human epithelial cells and B lymphocytes. It would be potentially valuable to develop novel combined assays to benefit screening for large panels of samples of EBV infectious diseases. Experimental design: A simple antigen-probed biochip that is modified with S-S-PEG-COOH and is used as a label-free high-throughput screening method for a combined detection of EBV capsid antigen IgM antibody, capsid antigen IgG antibody, and nuclear antigen IgG antibody.Results: This protein biochip has similar feasibility, sensitivity, and specificity in comparison with Liaison chemiluminescent immunoassay (CLIA). Detection limit of the EBV antibodies by the biochip is almost identical to that by CLIA-L (2.91 U mL -1 vs 3.00 U mL -1 for EBNA-1 IgG, 8 U mL -1 vs10 U mL -1 for EBV-VCA IgG, and 3.5 U mL -1 vs 10 U mL -1 for EBV-VCA IgM). Tests of the three serological antibodies against EBV by the biochip are consistent with the CLIA-L method in 274 clinical sera, respectively. Finally, the combined biochip is successfully utilized for diagnostic identification of EBV infection in 14 patients with infectious mononucleosis (IM) and 25 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus SLE, as well as additional 10 known real-time PCR positive patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

S‐S‐PEG‐COOH Self‐Assembled Monolayer on Gold Surface Enabled a Combined Assay for Serological EBV Antibody Isotypes

Liu

et al. 2018

Proteomics Clinical Apps

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our observations demonstrated the ability of diagnostic scores to improve either the sensitivity or specificity of multi-antibody assays; these findings are consistent with bioinformatic theory [ 49 ] and with prior studies using diagnostic scores to interpret multi-antibody assays [ 34 , 48 ]. Although the present study evaluated multiple kinetic-EIA antibody assays performed separately, this multi-antibody approach could be adapted to a multiplex platform using equally sensitive technology (e.g., microsphere and biochip assays); these multiplex platforms hold the potential for simpler and faster Lyme disease serodiagnosis [ 48 , 54 , 66 ]. While multiplex assay standardization presents technical challenges [ 67 ], a diagnostic score can still be utilized effectively based on the same mathematical principles [ 48 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both Ledue et al [ 68 ] and Pegalajar-Jurado et al [ 29 ] observed that the sensitivity of the Oxford Immunotec C6 IgG/IgM EIA appeared equivalent to the Liaison ® VlsE-IgG/IgM chemiluminescent assay for early neurological disease. A recently developed FTIS biochip immunoassay by Huang et al [ 66 ] demonstrated better sensitivity using VlsE-IgG than C6-IgG in 56 patients with neuroborreliosis (75% versus 54%, respectively). Although the Bacon, Liang, and Huang studies used the same C6 sequence from Borrelia garinii , different assay techniques and patient populations may have contributed to differences in assay sensitivity for neuroborreliosis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing use of multi-antibody assays for Lyme disease diagnosis: A bioinformatic approach

Porwancher

Landsberg

2021

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple different recombinant and peptide antigens are now available for serodiagnosis of Lyme disease (LD), but optimizing test utilization remains challenging. Since 1995 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recommended a 2-tiered serologic approach consisting of a first-tier whole-cell enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for polyvalent antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi followed by confirmation of positive or equivocal results by IgG and IgM immunoblots [standard 2-tiered (STT) approach]. Newer modified 2-tiered (MTT) approaches employ a second-tier EIA to detect antibodies to B. burgdorferi rather than immunoblotting. We applied modern bioinformatic techniques to a large public database of recombinant and peptide antigen-based immunoassays to improve testing strategy. A retrospective CDC collection of 280 LD samples and 559 controls had been tested using the STT approach as well as kinetic-EIAs for VlsE1-IgG, C6-IgG, VlsE1-IgM, and pepC10-IgM antibodies. When used individually, the cutoff for each kinetic-EIA was set to generate 99% specificity. Utilizing logistic-likelihood regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) techniques we determined that VlsE1-IgG, C6-IgG, and pepC10-IgM antibodies each contributed significant diagnostic information; a single-tier diagnostic score (DS) was generated for each sample using a weighted linear combination of antibody levels to these 3 antigens. DS performance was then compared to the STT and to MTT models employing different combinations of kinetic-EIAs. After setting the DS cutoff to match STT specificity (99%), the DS was 22.5% more sensitive than the STT for early-acute-phase disease (95% CI: 11.8% to 32.2%), 16.0% more sensitive for early-convalescent-phase disease (95% CI: 7.2% to 24.7%), and equivalent for detection of disseminated infection. The DS was also significantly more sensitive for early-acute-phase LD than MTT models whose specificity met or exceeded 99%. Prospective validation of this single-tier diagnostic score for Lyme disease will require larger studies using a broader range of potential cross-reacting conditions.

show abstract

“…While biochips are a relatively new area of research, there have been some efforts to develop a functional biochip for Lyme disease. Huang et al (2017) reported a biochip for the detection of B. burgdorferi, B. garinii, and B. afzelii that measured antibody responses to six Borrelia-specific antigens [46]. Of these six antigens, three were general to Borrelia species (flagellin, OspC, VlsE), and three were unique to each of the three species (VlsE IR6 peptides); this allowed for both confirmation of Lyme disease and differentiation between species.…”

Section: Biochipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lyme Disease Biosensors: A Potential Solution to a Diagnostic Dilemma

Flynn

Ignaszak

2020

Biosensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past four decades, Lyme disease has remained a virulent and pervasive illness, persisting throughout North America and many other regions of the world. Recent increases in illness in many countries has sparked a renewed interest in improved Lyme diagnostics. While current standards of diagnosis are acceptable for the late stages of the disease, it remains difficult to accurately diagnose early forms of the illness. In addition, current diagnostic methods tend to be relatively expensive and require a large degree of laboratory-based analysis. Biosensors represent the fusion of biological materials with chemical techniques to provide simple, inexpensive alternatives to traditional diagnostic methods. Lyme disease biosensors have the potential to better diagnose early stages of the illness and provide possible patients with an inexpensive, commercially available test. This review examines the current state of Lyme disease biosensing, with a focus on previous biosensor development and essential future considerations.

show abstract

A biochip-based combined immunoassay for detection of serological status of Borrelia burgdorferi in Lyme borreliosis

Cited by 11 publications

References 40 publications

S‐S‐PEG‐COOH Self‐Assembled Monolayer on Gold Surface Enabled a Combined Assay for Serological EBV Antibody Isotypes

S‐S‐PEG‐COOH Self‐Assembled Monolayer on Gold Surface Enabled a Combined Assay for Serological EBV Antibody Isotypes

Optimizing use of multi-antibody assays for Lyme disease diagnosis: A bioinformatic approach

Lyme Disease Biosensors: A Potential Solution to a Diagnostic Dilemma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About