Research Tracker›Biomarker Atlas›Marker Pages›Anaplasma phagocytophilum serology

Anaplasma phagocytophilum serology: biomarker evidence

Anaplasma phagocytophilum serology appears in 1 entry of the OSMF biomarker atlas, covering Lyme Disease. Across those entries it is elevated in 1. It is currently reported in a single condition in this atlas; cross-condition comparison will be added as the dataset grows. Each row below links to a page with the comparison group, associated symptoms, test details and primary citation.

Lyme Disease

Where Anaplasma phagocytophilum serology is reported

Also listed as: Tick co-infection

ConditionDirectionCompared againstAssociated symptomsSource
Lyme Disease↑ elevatedUninfectedCo-infection with LymeSwanson et al. 2022

Frequently asked questions

In which conditions is Anaplasma phagocytophilum serology altered?

In the OSMF atlas Anaplasma phagocytophilum serology is reported in Lyme Disease. It is elevated in 1 across 1 entries.

Is there a standard clinical test for Anaplasma phagocytophilum serology?

The atlas entries for Anaplasma phagocytophilum serology do not carry a LOINC code, which usually means the marker was measured with research assays or study-specific methods rather than a routine clinical panel.

Is one abnormal Anaplasma phagocytophilum serology result diagnostic?

No single biomarker result is diagnostic of any of these conditions. Findings reflect group averages from published cohorts with substantial overlap between patients and controls.

Cite this page

Open Source Medicine Foundation. (2026). Anaplasma phagocytophilum serology across conditions: biomarker evidence. OSMF Research Tracker. Retrieved October 7, 2026, from https://research.opensourcemed.info/biomarkers/markers/anaplasma-phagocytophilum-serology.html
Get OSMF research updates. New biomarker, trial and treatment evidence summaries by email.
Subscribe on Substack

Last reviewed: 2026-06-29 · Browse: Biomarker Index · All marker pages · Biomarker Atlas

Disclaimer: Educational synthesis of peer-reviewed research; not medical advice. Findings are group-level and vary with study design. Discuss any result with a qualified clinician.