Effectiveness and safety of multidrug therapy containing clofazimine for paucibacillary leprosy and clarithromycin for rifampicin-resistant leprosy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: The present study aimed to evaluate leprosy cure and relapse rates as primary outcomes related to two additional strategies for leprosy treatment: clofazimine for paucibacillary (PB) leprosy patients and clarithromycin for patients with rifampicin-resistant leprosy. Methods: We conducted two systematic reviews (protocols CRD42022308272 and CRD42022308260). We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS, Virtual Health Library and Cochrane Library databases, registers of clinical trial databases and gray literature. We included clinical trials evaluating the addition of clofazimine to PB leprosy treatment and the use of clarithromycin for treating patients with rifampicin-resistant leprosy. Risk of bias (RoB) in randomized clinical trials was assessed by the RoB 2 tool and that in non-randomized clinical trials was assessed by the ROBINS-I tool; and the certainty of the evidence was assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. A meta-analysis of dichotomous outcomes was performed. Results: For clofazimine, four studies were included. Cure and relapse rates were not different with the addition of clofazimine to PB leprosy treatment and demonstrated very low certainty of evidence. For clarithromycin, six studies were included. Considerable heterogeneity resulted from the difference between comparators, and studies showed no difference in the assessed outcomes with the addition of clarithromycin to rifampicin-resistant leprosy treatment. Mild adverse events were reported for both drugs but did not significantly impact treatment. Discussion: The effectiveness of both drugs still needs to be determined. Adding clofazimine to PB leprosy treatment may reduce the repercussions of an incorrect operational classification with no apparent relevant side effects. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022308272; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022308260, identifier: CRD42022308272; CRD42022308260.

Antimicrobial Resistance among Leprosy Patients in Brazil: Real-World Data Based on the National Surveillance Plan.

Brazil ranks second among countries for new cases and first for relapse cases of leprosy worldwide. The Mycobacterium leprae Resistance Surveillance Plan was established. We aimed to present the results of a 2-year follow-up of the National Surveillance Plan in Brazil. A cross-sectional study of leprosy cases was performed to investigate antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Brazil from October 2018 to September 2020. Molecular screening targeting genes related to dapsone (folP1), rifampin (rpoB), and ofloxacin resistance (gyrA) was performed. During the referral period, 63,520 active leprosy patients were registered in Brazil, and 1,183 fulfilled the inclusion criteria for molecular AMR investigation. In total, only 16 (1.4%) patients had genetic polymorphisms associated with AMR. Of these, 8 (50%) had cases of leprosy relapse, 7 (43.8%) had cases of suspected therapeutic failure with standard treatment, and 1 (6.2%) was a case of new leprosy presentation. M. leprae strains with AMR-associated mutations were found for all three genes screened. Isolates from two patients showed simultaneous resistance to dapsone and rifampin, indicating multidrug resistance (MDR). No significant relationship between clinical variables and the presence of AMR was identified. Our study revealed a low frequency of AMR in Brazil. Isolates were resistant mainly to dapsone, and a very low number of isolates were resistant to rifampin, the main bactericidal agent for leprosy, or presented MDR, reinforcing the importance of the standard World Health Organization multidrug therapy. The greater frequency of AMR among relapsed patients supports the need to constantly monitor this group.

Antimicrobial resistance among leprosy patients in Brazil: real-world data based on the National Surveillance plan

Brazil ranks second among countries for new cases and first for relapse cases of leprosy worldwide. The Mycobacterium leprae Resistance Surveillance Plan was established. We aimed to present the results of a 2-year follow-up of the National Surveillance Plan in Brazil. A cross-sectional study of leprosy cases was performed to investigate antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Brazil from October 2018 to September 2020. Molecular screening targeting genes related to dapsone (folP1), rifampin (rpoB), and ofloxacin resistance (gyrA) was performed. During the referral period, 63,520 active leprosy patients were registered in Brazil, and 1,183 fulfilled the inclusion criteria for molecular AMR investigation. In total, only 16 (1.4%) patients had genetic polymorphisms associated with AMR. Of these, 8 (50%) had cases of leprosy relapse, 7 (43.8%) had cases of suspected therapeutic failure with standard treatment, and 1 (6.2%) was a case of new leprosy presentation. M. leprae strains with AMR-associated mutations were found for all three genes screened. Isolates from two patients showed simultaneous resistance to dapsone and rifampin, indicating multidrug resistance (MDR). No significant relation ship between clinical variables and the presence of AMR was identified. Our study revealed a low frequency of AMR in Brazil. Isolates were resistant mainly to dapsone, and a very low number of isolates were resistant to rifampin, the main bactericidal agent for leprosy, or presented MDR, reinforcing the importance of the standard World Health Organization multidrug therapy. The greater frequency of AMR among relapsed patients supports the need to constantly monitor this group

Leprosy detection rate in patients under immunosuppression for the treatment of dermatological, rheumatological, and gastroenterological diseases: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recently developed immunosuppressive drugs, especially TNF antagonists, may enhance the risk of granulomatous infections, including leprosy. We aimed to evaluate the leprosy detection rate in patients under immunosuppression due to rheumatological, dermatological and gastroenterological diseases. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, Web of Science and Scielo databases through 2018. No date or language restrictions were applied. We included all articles that reported the occurrence of leprosy in patients under medication-induced immunosuppression. RESULTS: The search strategy resulted in 15,103 articles; finally, 20 articles were included, with 4 reporting longitudinal designs. The detection rate of leprosy ranged from 0.13 to 116.18 per 100,000 patients/year in the USA and Brazil, respectively. In the meta-analysis, the detection rate of cases of leprosy per 100,000 immunosuppressed patients with rheumatic diseases was 84 (detection rate = 0.00084; 95% CI = 0.0000-0.00266; I2 = 0%, p = 0.55). CONCLUSION: Our analysis showed that leprosy was relatively frequently detected in medication-induced immunosuppressed patients suffering from rheumatological diseases, and further studies are needed. The lack of an active search for leprosy in the included articles precluded more precise conclusions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This review is registered in PROSPERO with the registry number CRD42018116275 .

A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the diagnostic accuracy and screening of tests to detect antimicrobial resistance in leprosy.

Although multidrug therapy is considered an effective treatment for leprosy, antimicrobial resistance is a serious concern. We performed a systematic review of studies on the diagnostic accuracy and screening of tests for antimicrobial resistance in leprosy. This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020177958). In April 2020, we searched for studies in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Scielo, and LILACS databases. A random effects regression model was used for the meta-analysis. We included 129 studies. Molecular tests for dapsone resistance had a sensitivity of 78.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 65.6-87.9) and a specificity of 97.0% (95% CI = 94.0-98.6). Molecular tests for rifampicin resistance had a sensitivity and specificity of 88.7% (95% CI = 80.0-93.9) and 97.3% (95% CI = 94.3-98.8), respectively. Molecular tests for ofloxacin resistance had a sensitivity and specificity of 80.9% (95% CI = 60.1-92.3) and 96.1% (95% CI = 90.2-98.5), respectively. In recent decades, no increase in the resistance proportion was detected. However, the growing number of resistant cases is still a clinical concern.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the diagnostic accuracy and screening of tests to detect antimicrobial resistance in leprosy

Although multidrug therapy is considered an effective treatment for leprosy, antimicrobial resistance is a serious concern. We performed a systematic review of studies on the diagnostic accuracy and screening of tests for antimicrobial resistance in leprosy. This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020177958). In April 2020, we searched for studies in the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Scielo, and LILACS databases. A random effects regression model was used for the meta-analysis. We included 129 studies. Molecular tests for dapsone resistance had a sensitivity of 78.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 65.6−87.9) and a specificity of 97.0% (95% CI = 94.0−98.6). Molecular tests for rifampicin resistance had a sensitivity and specificity of 88.7% (95% CI = 80.0−93.9) and 97.3% (95% CI = 94.3−98.8), respectively. Molecular tests for ofloxacin resistance had a sensitivity and specificity of 80.9% (95% CI = 60.1−92.3) and 96.1% (95% CI = 90.2−98.5), respectively. In recent decades, no increase in the resistance proportion was detected. However, the growing number of resistant cases is still a clinical concern(AU).