New Lyme test using nanotrap technology in urine samples

A new test to detect Lyme infections is available. It was validated in a study here.
(The test can be bought online here or here and probably from other providers as well).

The quoted part of the study below is particularly interesting for people who have been sick for a long time. Looking forward to getting your views on the test.


" Treated patients under clinical evaluation for persistent or recurrent LB
Urinary OspA shedding was further evaluated in a cohort of 100 patients in a Lyme endemic geographic region who were under clinical surveillance for persistent or recurrent LB.

All of these patients had been previously treated with antibiotics, and all patients had been followed because of prolonged chronic functional symptoms such as arthralgias, neurocognitive symptoms, and fatigue. All of these patients lacked a CDC criteria defined LB serology positive IgG western blot serum test at the time of urine collection [34].

According to the IDSA (Infectious Diseases Society of America) 2006 and 2010 guidelines [35, 36], “To date, there is no convincing biologic evidence for the existence of symptomatic chronic B. burgdorferi infection among patients after receipt of recommended treatment regimens for Lyme disease.”

In contrast, according to ILADS (The International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society), the diagnosis of persistent Lyme disease is a real phenomenon and often requires clinical judgment to be characterized [34].

Due to the frequent nonspecific nature of complaints and insensitivities of diagnostic studies, the clinician is forced to weigh the risk profile of any individual presenting with what may be considered Lyme disease. This includes the risk of tick exposure and the presenting symptom complex [8, 34, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42].

In this study, urinary OspA scoring was performed blinded to the patient diagnosis or clinical findings. After the urine OspA scoring was completed, the clinical data was unblinded.

For this special group of previously treated patients under surveillance for persistent or recurrent LB, 41/100 were positive for urinary OspA C-terminal peptides (Additional file 1: Table S6).

This percentage of patients with positive urinary OspA is in keeping with the range of seven previous studies conducted in endemic areas where patients were being evaluated for suspected Lyme disease: 7–31 % active disease and 5–20 % previous Lyme disease in endemic areas [43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49]." (My bolding)

 

Thank you @Helen , We are making progress, as this test evidenced - as does the lawsuit against the IDSA and its authors...as does the new LYME working committee...as does...Well, progress is often a slow beast, but today a cattle prod is at play.

 

Oh, I suspect they may still need to resolve late stage issues - that's what in good measure undermined recent direct metrics, and, of course, pretty much sentenced to failure many historical offerings like PCR and other direct antigen wannabees. Hopefully I am wrong about that.

 

Hi @duncan , good to see you here. I hoped that you would comment on the test. The technology seems to have been used for a decade. I guess, Lipkin must have experience from using it as he has been working with Ebola and Zika infections among others. Earlier we were told that he would present a valid test for Lyme infections. This one?

"The Nanotrap® Lyme Antigen Test is powered by the novel Nanotrap® nanoparticle technology. Orinigally invented to detect cancer at the earliest stages, these nanoparticles have been adapted to many areas of infectious disease detection, including malaria, tuberculosis, Ebola, and Zika.
This technology is patented and widely published in scientific journals and has been developed for over a decade with funding from the Department of Defense, the National Institutes of Health, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.... "

https://www.lymedx.com/

 

If my memory is right @Helen , either Mark Davis or Ron Davis used the CeroNanotrap in one of their studies. I was very pleased to see that because most study efforts in the US stick to the 2T when looking for Bb in a cohort.

My ID is also involved in trialing a version of the ELISPOT.

More and hopefully better diagnostics for patients can only be a good thing. And then there is the additional benefit of putting pressure on the old monopoly of ELISA and WB tests.