New paper from Vibrant Wellness - on testing for Tick Borne Infections

In summary –
Their test methodology is to make use of silicone chip technology to allow miniaturisation of many individual antigens into a multiplexed test (multiplexed = tests many antigens at once) so that it can be performed as an automated test for many infections in a single run and return results within a day with cost benefits.
I have previously been wary of this test company due to lack of rigorous validation studies or detailed description of exactly how its performance was evaluated.

But in this paper, they describe and provide more details of how the test is made and how it was validated
To my mind the paper is actually of better quality and thoroughness than the igenex paper we saw recently on their recombinant immunoblots - reasons being:
1. The number of positive control samples tested against was higher
2. This paper evaluated run to run consistency, lowest detection limits and other consistency and repeatability performance - which Igenex did not provide
3. The journal it is published in is regarded as the most prestigious of journals Nature - which is quite an achievement where lyme disease testing is concerned – and implies ( but does not guarantee) rigor in the peer review process and higher quality papers
4. The authors list exactly where the positive and negative reference samples came from and crucially – how they were deemed positive

this last issue is a key point as all sensitivity and specificity calculations depend on the reference or “golden samples” used as reference, and if, for instance , with a serologic test, all reference samples were also serologic positives – then some circular logic exists that has the potential to overestimate the new tests performance – an issue that does appears to exist with the igenex test )

There are similarities on how these two tests work - these are both still serological test – based on selected antigens for each pathogen. This test also uses recombinant proteins as antigens and also separates them physically - but here this is done on silicone chip arrays – rather than on paper as the Igenex approach uses. The vibrant test tests for many pathogens in one test - whereas Igenex prefer to do separate tests for each pathogen.

There are still things which are not detailed or that we cannot know - and there are still some limitations of all serologic testing in all chronic infections ( which may be partly compensated for by the use of multiple antigens ) but from what I have seen this approach looks as good as the Igenex test in terms of performance for lyme disease - and the validation data is more compelling with higher statistical value and less gaps than the igenex one - and this test has the advantage that with a single test it can detect many tick born infections with good sensitivity and specificity

Just thought I would post it up as I have been a little dismissive of them in the past as a “2nd tier lab” due to lack of available information – but based on this later publication I would have much better confidence
It has broad coverage for many borrelia species and strains, several key bartonella species, anaplasma and ehrlichia, many rickettsia species as well as many of the tick born viruses. It may be a little light on babesia species - focussing mainly on b. microti and duncani - but no mention of b. odecoilei or divergens - its not clear if the antigens used would react with these other species.

Especially for patients that haven’t done any testing and want to test for a broad array of pathogens in one go, cost effectively this would seem to be a decent option.

I hope the review is of some help

link to paper here https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-84467-0#

Hi Vim

as far as i can see the paper is describing the validation of their existing test that's been around for some time - getting the study published in nature was probably a multi year effort - so its probably been in the works for a while

their approach has space on the chip for more antigens for future pathogens to be added - so they may update the test from time to time so it can detect more pathogens - but the basic approach is the same

i believe the test can be accessed in europe via a health practitioner who orders it on the behalf of the patient.
same as most infection tests

as you say - knowing what infections are present is only part of the solution

one new test does not change the entire medical system - or the people in it that were educated from text books that were already 30 years out of date at the time - as is the case in most of europe when it comes to tick borne infections.

that said - the route that Igenex went with a test that uses the same type of core technology - by gaining FDA clearance on their test - so now patients with a positive result from that test have a strong case to demand treatment from their doctors - and pressure will mount on insurers to cover treatment costs - as the private test can no longer be dismissed as false, or unreliable, or invalidated if the FDA are essentially saying its as good as a western blot

vibrant could go the same way - given that igenex have opened that door already and the technology is essentially the same - its hard to see an objection - which would then also help patients advocate for better treatment.

it does seem like the tide is slowly turning, tests are improving and recognition is growing - but the process will take many years - probably starting in the USA where there is more political pressure from patient advocate groups and politicians who are aware, bills passed etc. from there it will gradually filter down to other countries - especially in Europe - who by and large take their lead from the USA.

When I test, which is about once a year now, I always do so with Igenex. After reading so much, I came to believe the immunoblot is about as sensitive and specific as I could hope for with Borellia and bartonella. That doesn't mean it is, but from all I have looked into over the years, that is what led me to that conclusion.

Also, since Igenex is now covered by Medicare, that is a bonus positive for me. Taht's not the main reason I use it, but saving a thousand or two on top of belief in in led to that decision. Garzie's points on the FDA clearance also back up my thoughts. But who the hell really knows in the long run? We just go with the best information we can find.