Review Question - QID 210562

A 35-year-old man presents to his primary care provider in Philadelphia with a skin rash on his right thigh. He reports that the rash appeared 3 days ago. He recently returned from a weeklong trip to his vacation home in central Pennsylvania. He denies pain, numbness, paresthesias, itchiness, or burning around the rash. He does not recall finding any ticks on his body. He otherwise feels well. His past medical history is notable for gout. He takes allopurinol. He is an avid hiker and spends 3 months out of the year hiking. He does not smoke and drinks alcohol socially. His temperature is 98.6°F (37.0°C), blood pressure is 129/68 mmHg, pulse is 80/min, respirations are 14/min, and oxygen saturation is 99% on room air. On exam, he has a bullseye-like circular erythematous rash on the anterolateral aspect of his right thigh. The doctor decided to perform a new serum test for Lyme disease that was trialed at the same hospital in Philadelphia, where it was shown to have a sensitivity of 91% and specificity of 94%. The prevalence of Lyme disease in the area is among the highest in the country. How would the sensitivity and specificity of this new test change if it were performed on a patient in Texas, an area with a very low prevalence of Lyme disease?