{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,7]],"date-time":"2026-02-07T01:32:40Z","timestamp":1770427960204,"version":"3.49.0"},"reference-count":11,"publisher":"American Society for Microbiology","issue":"5","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2004,9,1]],"date-time":"2004-09-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1093996800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/journals.asm.org\/non-commercial-tdm-license"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["journals.asm.org"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Clin Vaccine Immunol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2004,9]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>ABSTRACT<\/jats:title>\n          <jats:p>\n            Three commercial Lyme disease Western immunoblotting (WB) kits and the C6\n            <jats:italic>Borrelia burgdorferi<\/jats:italic>\n            (Lyme) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit were compared using two commercially available performance panels from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Boston Biomedica (BBI). Combined, the panels consisted of 52 characterized specimens. Immunoglobulin G (IgG) sensitivity was similar for the three WB products. The BBI and Marblot WBs were more specific for IgG antibodies, while the Virablot was the most sensitive for IgM antibody. The BBI WB was 100% specific for IgM, while Marblot was 97% and Virablot was 77% specific for IgM. The C6 ELISA was found to be 100% sensitive. Four false-positive C6 results were identified in patients that had clinically and microbiologically confirmed Lyme disease but were not detected by the CDC reference methods. No one WB product showed overall superiority. The C6 ELISA shows promise as the first ELISA for Lyme disease that would not require a supplemental test such as a WB.\n          <\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1128\/cdli.11.5.924-929.2004","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2004,9,9]],"date-time":"2004-09-09T16:35:03Z","timestamp":1094747703000},"page":"924-929","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1128\/asmj-crossmark-policy-page","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":32,"title":["Comparison of Western Immunoblotting and the C6 Lyme Antibody Test for Laboratory Detection of Lyme Disease"],"prefix":"10.1128","volume":"11","author":[{"given":"Elena","family":"Mogilyansky","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Chien Chang","family":"Loa","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Martin E.","family":"Adelson","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Eli","family":"Mordechai","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Richard C.","family":"Tilton","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Medical Diagnostic Laboratories, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"235","reference":[{"key":"e_1_3_1_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"891","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.1992.03490070073045","volume":"268","year":"1992","unstructured":"Bakken, L. L., K. L. Case, S. M. Callister, N. J. Bourdeau, and R. F. Schell. 1992. Performance of 45 laboratories participating in a proficiency testing program for Lyme disease serology. JAMA268:891-895.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_3_2","first-page":"590","volume":"44","year":"1995","unstructured":"Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1995. Recommendation for test performance and interpretation from the Second National Conference on Serologic Diagnosis of Lyme Disease. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep.44:590-591.","journal-title":"Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1128\/CDLI.8.1.79-84.2001"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_5_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1128\/jcm.27.12.2834-2837.1989"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"470","DOI":"10.1007\/BF01713052","volume":"24","year":"1996","unstructured":"Hofmann, H. 1996. Lyme borreliosis\u2014problems of serological diagnosis. Infection24:470-472.","journal-title":"Infection"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1128\/JCM.37.12.3997-4004.1999"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1455","DOI":"10.1086\/315862","volume":"182","year":"2000","unstructured":"Liang, F. T., E. Aberer, M. Cinco, L. Gern, C. M. Hu, Y. N. Lobet, M. Ruscio, P. E. Voet, Jr., V. E. Weynants, and M. T. Philipp. 2000. Antigenic conservation of an immunodominant invariable region of the VlsE lipoprotein among European pathogenic genospecies of Borrelia burgdorferi SL. J. Infect. Dis.182:1455-1462.","journal-title":"J. Infect. Dis."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_9_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1128\/JCM.37.12.3990-3996.1999"},{"key":"e_1_3_1_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"649","DOI":"10.1099\/0022-1317-51-8-649","volume":"51","year":"2002","unstructured":"Magnarelli, L. A., M. Lawrenz, S. J. Norris, and E. Fikrig. 2002. Comparative reactivity of human sera to recombinant VlsE and other Borrelia burgdorferi antigens in class-specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for Lyme borreliosis. J. Med. Microbiol.51:649-655.","journal-title":"J. Med. Microbiol."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_11_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"145","DOI":"10.1016\/S0196-4399(03)80050-8","volume":"25","year":"2003","unstructured":"Tilton, R. C. 2003. New tests for Lyme disease. Clin. Microbiol. Newsl.25:145-149.","journal-title":"Clin. Microbiol. Newsl."},{"key":"e_1_3_1_12_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S31","DOI":"10.1086\/516173","volume":"25","year":"1997","unstructured":"Tilton, R. C., M. N. Sand, and M. Manak. 1997. The Western immunoblot for Lyme disease: determination of sensitivity, specificity, and interpretive criteria with use of commercially available performance panels. Clin. Infect. Dis.25(Suppl. 1):S31-S34.","journal-title":"Clin. Infect. Dis."}],"container-title":["Clinical and Vaccine Immunology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.asm.org\/doi\/pdf\/10.1128\/CDLI.11.5.924-929.2004","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.asm.org\/doi\/pdf\/10.1128\/CDLI.11.5.924-929.2004","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,7,29]],"date-time":"2021-07-29T20:35:10Z","timestamp":1627590910000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.asm.org\/doi\/10.1128\/CDLI.11.5.924-929.2004"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2004,9]]},"references-count":11,"journal-issue":{"issue":"5","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2004,9]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1128\/CDLI.11.5.924-929.2004"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1128\/cdli.11.5.924-929.2004","relation":{},"ISSN":["1556-6811","1556-679X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1556-6811","type":"print"},{"value":"1556-679X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2004,9]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2004-05-13","order":0,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2004-07-19","order":1,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2020-12-18","order":2,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}