Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 28, Number 12—December 2022
Synopsis

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Lyme Disease Data and Seropositivity for Borrelia burgdorferi, China, 2005‒2020

James H. StarkComments to Author , Xiuyan Li, Ji Chun Zhang, Leah Burn, Srinivas R. Valluri, Jiaxin Liang, Kaijie Pan, Mark A. Fletcher, Raphael Simon, Luis Jodar, and Bradford D. Gessner
Author affiliations: Pfizer Inc., Collegeville, Pennsylvania, USA (J.H. Stark, K. Pan, L. Jodar, B.D. Gessner); Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut, USA (X. Li); Pfizer China, Beijing, China (J.C. Zhang, J. Liang); P95 Pharmacovigilance & Epidemiology, Princeton, New Jersey, USA (L. Burn); Pfizer Inc., New York, New York, USA (S.R. Valluri); Pfizer Emerging Markets, Paris, France (M.A. Fletcher); Pfizer Vaccine Research & Development, Pearl River, New York, USA (R. Simon)

Main Article

Table 1

Modeled estimates of seropositivity for Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in China, 2005–2020*

Variable Seropositivity estimates, no. (study denominator sample size)† Modeled seropositivity, % (95% CI)
Primary analysis: IgG only
 72 (34,719)
 9.1 (7.5–10.7)
Sensitivity analysis
IgM and IgG 35 (9,446) 14.5 (11.8–17.2)
EIA‡ + WB
 16 (8,837)
 1.8 (0.9–2.7)
Exposure group
Clinical suspicion 10 (3,982) 7.1 (6.4–8.0)
Low risk 10 (5,245) 4.5 (3.9–5.1)
Moderate risk 12 (5,300) 6.1 (5.4–6.7)
High risk
 40 (20,192)
 10.0 (9.6–10.4)
Sex
F 21 (7,542) 10.0 (6.6–13.2)
M
 21 (8,223)
 9.4 (6.2–12.6)
Age group, y
<20 13 (1,420) 12.0 (4.4–19.6)
20–29 11 (1,416) 12.3 (6.3–18.4)
30–39 11 (1,734) 14.5 (5.9–23.1)
40–49 11 (1,757) 14.2 (8.5–20.0)
50–59 11 (1,434) 13.1 (8.5–17.7)
>60 12 (1,429) 12.6 (6.6–18.5)

*EIA, enzyme immunoassay; WB, Western blot. †Positive test results: primary analysis = 2,859; sensitivity analysis IgM and IgG = 1,260; sensitivity analysis EIA + WB = 147. ‡First-tier test was either an ELISA or immunofluorescence assay.

Main Article

Page created: November 01, 2022
Page updated: November 21, 2022
Page reviewed: November 21, 2022
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external