Leprosy survey among rural communities and wild armadillos from Amazonas state, Northern Brazil.

There is evidence that in southern US, leprosy is a zoonosis infecting wild Dasypus novemcinctus armadillos but the extent of this finding is unknown. This ecological study investigated leprosy in rural communities and in wild armadillos from the Brazilian Amazon. The study area was the Mamiá Lake of Coari municipality, Amazonas State, Northern region, a hyper endemic leprosy area where residents live on subsistence farming, fishing and armadillo hunting and its meat intake are frequent. The leprosy survey was conducted in sixteen communities by a visiting team of specialists. Local partakers provided wild armadillos to investigate M. leprae infection. Volunteers had complete dermato-neurological examination by a dermatologist with expertise in leprosy diagnosis, suspect skin lesions were biopsied for histopathology (Hematoxylin-eosin/HE, Fite-Faraco/FF staining); slit skin smears were collected. Armadillos' tissue fragments (skins, spleens, livers, lymph nodes, adrenal glands, others) were prepared for histopathology (HE/FF) and for M. leprae repetitive element-RLEP-qPCR. Among 176 volunteers, six new indeterminate leprosy cases were identified (incidence = 3.4%). Suspect skin sections and slit skin smears were negative for bacilli. Twelve wild D. novemcinctus were investigated (48 specimens/96 slides) and histopathological features of M. leprae infection were not found, except for one skin presenting unspecific inflammatory infiltrate suggestive of indeterminate leprosy. Possible traumatic neuroma, granuloma with epithelioid and Langhans cells, foreign-body granuloma were also identified. Granulomatous/non-granulomatous dermatitides were periodic-acid-Schiff/PAS negative for fungus. M. leprae-RLEP-qPCR was negative in all armadillos' tissues; no bacillus was found in histopathology. Our survey in rural communities confirmed the high endemicity for leprosy while one armadillo was compatible with paucibacillary M. leprae infection. At least in the highly endemic rural area of Coari, in the Brazilian Amazon region where infectious sources from untreated multibacillary leprosy are abundant, M. leprae infected armadillos may not represent a major source of infection nor a significant public health concern.

qPCR detection of Mycobacterium leprae in biopsies and slit skin smear of different leprosy clinical forms

Abstract Leprosy, whose etiological agent is Mycobacterium leprae, is a chronic infectious disease that mainly affects the skin and peripheral nervous system. The diagnosis of leprosy is based on clinical evaluation, whereas histopathological analysis and bacilloscopy are complementary diagnostic tools. Quantitative PCR (qPCR), a current useful tool for diagnosis of infectious diseases, has been used to detect several pathogens including Mycobacterium leprae. The validation of this technique in a robust set of samples comprising the different clinical forms of leprosy is still necessary. Thus, in this study samples from 126 skin biopsies (collected from patients on all clinical forms and reactional states of leprosy) and 25 slit skin smear of leprosy patients were comparatively analyzed by qPCR (performed with primers for the RLEP region of M. leprae DNA) and routine bacilloscopy performed in histological sections or in slit skin smear. Considering clinical diagnostic as the gold standard, 84.9% of the leprosy patients were qPCR positive in skin biopsies, resulting in 84.92% sensitivity, with 84.92 and 61.22% positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values, respectively. Concerning bacilloscopy of histological sections (BI/H), the sensitivity was 80.15% and the PPV and NPV were 80.15 and 44.44%, respectively. The concordance between qPCR and BI/H was 87.30%. Regarding the slit skin smear, 84% of the samples tested positive in the qPCR. Additionally, qPCR showed 100% specificity, since all samples from different mycobacteria, from healthy individuals, and from other granulomatous diseases presented negative results. In conclusion, the qPCR technique for detection of M. leprae using RLEP primers proved to be specific and sensitive, and qPCR can be used as a complementary test to diagnose leprosy irrespective of the clinical form of disease.

qPCR detection of Mycobacterium leprae in biopsies and slit skin smear of different leprosy clinical forms.

Leprosy, whose etiological agent is Mycobacterium leprae, is a chronic infectious disease that mainly affects the skin and peripheral nervous system. The diagnosis of leprosy is based on clinical evaluation, whereas histopathological analysis and bacilloscopy are complementary diagnostic tools. Quantitative PCR (qPCR), a current useful tool for diagnosis of infectious diseases, has been used to detect several pathogens including Mycobacterium leprae. The validation of this technique in a robust set of samples comprising the different clinical forms of leprosy is still necessary. Thus, in this study samples from 126 skin biopsies (collected from patients on all clinical forms and reactional states of leprosy) and 25 slit skin smear of leprosy patients were comparatively analyzed by qPCR (performed with primers for the RLEP region of M. leprae DNA) and routine bacilloscopy performed in histological sections or in slit skin smear. Considering clinical diagnostic as the gold standard, 84.9% of the leprosy patients were qPCR positive in skin biopsies, resulting in 84.92% sensitivity, with 84.92 and 61.22% positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values, respectively. Concerning bacilloscopy of histological sections (BI/H), the sensitivity was 80.15% and the PPV and NPV were 80.15 and 44.44%, respectively. The concordance between qPCR and BI/H was 87.30%. Regarding the slit skin smear, 84% of the samples tested positive in the qPCR. Additionally, qPCR showed 100% specificity, since all samples from different mycobacteria, from healthy individuals, and from other granulomatous diseases presented negative results. In conclusion, the qPCR technique for detection of M. leprae using RLEP primers proved to be specific and sensitive, and qPCR can be used as a complementary test to diagnose leprosy irrespective of the clinical form of disease.

Immunohistochemical assessment of cell populations in leprosy-spectrum lesions and reactional forms.

In situ immunophenotyping of leprosy lesions can improve our understanding of the biology of inflammatory cells during the immune response to Mycobacterium leprae antigens. In the present study, biopsies from 10 healthy controls and 70 leprosy patients were selected, 10 for each of the following conditions: clinical tuberculoid (TT), borderline tuberculoid (BT), borderline borderline (BB), borderline lepromatous (BL), lepromatous (LL), reversal reaction (R1), and erythema nodosum leprosum (R2). Qualitative and quantitative immunohistochemical analyses were performed to detect CD3, CD4, CD8, FoxP3, CD20, CD138, CD1a, CD57, CD15, CD117, CD68, and CD163. In addition, histochemistry was employed to identify eosinophils. The amount of CD3+ and CD4+ T cells was higher in TT than in LL patients. CD8+ T cells were predominant in T lymphocyte infiltrations in the basal layer of the epidermis. The number of FoxP3+ cells was similar among different forms of the disease, but was higher in BL and LL than in R2 individuals. CD20+ lymphocytes were most abundant in TT samples, while CD138+ plasma cells displayed no detectable differences. Epithelioid macrophages from the center of TT and R1 granulomas exhibited the M1 phenotype (CD68+CD163-), whereas those in LL granulomas showed the M2 phenotype (CD68+CD163+). There was a gradual decrease in the amount of CD1a+ cells from the TT towards the LL form of the disease. A significant increase in the number of neutrophils was observed only in R2 samples. All the cells investigated, except eosinophils, participated in the immunopathogenesis of leprosy.