Serum levels of interferon-gamma, tumour necrosis factor-alpha, soluble interleukin-6R and soluble cell activation markers for monitoring response to treatment of leprosy reactions.

Identifying pathogen and host-related laboratory parameters are essential for the early diagnosis of leprosy reactions. The present study aimed to clarify the validity of measuring the profiles of serum cytokines [interleukin (IL)-4, IL-6, IL-10, interferon (IFN)-gamma and tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha], the soluble IL-6 receptor (sIL-6R), soluble T cell (sCD27) and macrophage (neopterin) activation markers and Mycobacterium leprae-specific anti-PGL-I IgM antibodies in relation to the leprosy spectrum and reactions. Serum samples from 131 Indonesian leprosy patients (82 non-reactional leprosy patients and 49 reactional) and 112 healthy controls (HC) from the same endemic region were investigated. Forty-four (89.8%) of the reactional patients had erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL) while only five (10.2%) had reversal reaction (RR). Follow-up serum samples after corticosteroid treatment were also obtained from 17 of the patients with ENL and one with RR. A wide variability in cytokine levels was observed in the patient groups. However, IFN-gamma and sIL-6R were elevated significantly in ENL compared to non-ENL patients. Levels of IFN-gamma, TNF-alpha and sIL-6R declined significantly upon corticosteroid treatment of ENL. Thus, although the present study suggests limited applicability of serial measurement of IFN-gamma, TNF-alpha and sIL-6R in monitoring treatment efficacy of ENL, reactions it recommends a search for a wider panel of more disease-specific markers in future studies.

Epidemiology of leprosy on five isolated islands in the Flores Sea, Indonesia

We conducted a population-based survey on 5 small island in South Sulawesi Province (Indonesia) to collect baseline data previous to a chemoprophylactic intervention study aiming at interrrupting the transmission of Mycobacterium leprae. Here we describe the present leprosy epidemiology on these geographically isolated islands. Of the 4774 inhabitants living in the study area 4140 were screened for leprosy (coverage: 87%). We identified 96 leprosy patients (85 new and 11 old patients), representing a new case detection rate (CDR) of 205/10,000 and prevelence rate 195/10,000. CDRs were similar for males and females. Male patients were more often classified as multibacillary (MB) than women. Of the new patients, 33 (39%) were classified as MB, 16 (19%) as paucibacillary (PB) 2-5 lesions and 36 (42%) as PB single lesion. In this area of high leprosy endemicity leprosy patients were extensively clustered, i.e. not equally distributed among the islands and within the islands among the houses

Population survey to determine risk factors for Mycobacterium leprae transmission and infection

Background: Not every leprosy patient is equally effective in transmitting Mycobacterium leprae. We studied the spatial distribution of infection (using seropositivity as a marker) in the population to identifity which disease characteristics of leprosy patients are important in transmission. Methods: Clinical data and blood samples for anti-M.leprae ELISA were collected during a cross-sectional survey on five Indonesian islands highly endemic for leprosy. A geographic information system (GIS) was used to define contacts of patients. We investigated spatial clustering of patients and seropositive people and used logist regression to determine risk factors for seropositivity. Results: Of the 3986 people examined for leprosy, 3271 gave blood. Seroprevalence varied between islands (1.7-8.7%) and correlated significantly with leprosy prevalence. Five clusters of patients and two clusters of seropositives were detected. In multivariate analysis, seropositivity significantly differed to be the best discriminator of contact groups with higher seroprevalence: contacts of seropositive patients had an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.75 (95% CI: 0.92-3,31). This increased seroprevalence was strongest for contact groups living _< 75 metres of two seropositive patients (aOR:3.07;95%CI:1.74-5.42). Conclusions: In this highly endemic area for leprosy, not only household contacts of seropositive patients, but also persons living in the vicinity of seropositive patient were more likely to harbour antibodies against M.leprae. Through measuring the serological status of patients and using a broader definition of contacts, higher risk groups can be more specifically identified

Genetic, household and spatial clustering of leprosy in an island population in Indonesia

It is generally accepted that genetic factors play a role in susceptibility to both leprosy per se and leprosy type, but the strength of this effects has never been quantified. Estimating the contribution of genetic factors to clustering of leprosy within families is difficult since these persons often shave the same environment. Three correlation structures (genetic, household and spatial) were proposed for population data (n=560), collected on a geographically isolated Indonesian island highly endemic for leprosy, to explain the distribution of leprosy per se, leprosy type and Mycobacterium leprae-specific antibody. Heritability estimates and risk ratios for siblings were calculated to quantify the genetic effect. Leprosy was clinically diagnosed and specific anti-M.leprae antibodies were measured using ELISA. For leprosy per se in the total population the genetic correlation structure fitted best. In the population with relative stable household status (persons under 21 years and above 39 years) all structures were significant. For multibacillary leprosy (MB) genetic factors seemed more important than for paucibacillary leprosy. Seropositivity could be explained best by the apatial model, but the genetic model was also significant. Herediatry was 57% for leprosy per se and 31% for seropositivity. Genetic factors seem to play an important role in the clustering of leprosy patients, especially MB patients, and they could explain more then half of the toral phenotypic variance. This unique study population is very suitable to confirm the role of already known chromosome regions in controlling leprosy or to search for new susceptibility loci

Risk factores for developing leprosy -A population-based cohort study in Indonesia

This study identified risk factors for developing leprosy through yearly incidence rates in five island populations. Personal factors, like age, sex, household size and the presence of M.leprae-specific antibodies as well as contact were studied. Of the 94 index patients (patients diagnosed in 2000) 43 (46%) were classified as multibacillary (MB), 17 (19%) were seropositive and 6 (7%) presented M.leprae DNA in nasal swabs as determined by polumerase chain reaction (PCR). All PCR positive patients were also seropositive. Forty-four of the 4903 persons initially without symptoms of leprosy developed leprosy in almost four years follow-up, giving an incidence rate of 2.98 per 1000 person-years. Men had a 2.2 times higher risk (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.2-4.1) to developd leprosy than women. Persons living in households of more than 7 household members. Persons who were seropositive in 2000 had a 3.7 times higher risk (95% CI:1.1-12.4) than seronegative persons. Household contacts of MB patients had an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 4.6 (95% CI:1.6-12.9) and household contacts of PCR positive patients an aHR of 9.36 (95% CI: 2.5-34.9) compared to non-contacts. Patients with PCR positive nasal swabs, suggesting nasal excretion of M.leprae, are probably the patients with the highest transmission patential. Since all index patients who were PCR positive were also seropositive, serology semms an adequate tool to identify these patients. Preventing seropositive persons to become seropositive patients and thus the main source of infection may break the chain of transmission

Prevention of leprosy using rifampicin as chemoprophylaxis

An intervention study was implemented on five Indinesian island highly endemic for leprosy to determine whether rifampicin can be used as chemoprophylaxis to prevent leprosy. The population was actively screened before the intervention and subsequently once a year for three years. In the control group, no chemoprophylaxis was given. In the contact group, chemoprophylaxis was only given to contacts of leprosy patients and in the blanket group to all aligible persons. The cohort consited of 3,965 persons. The yearly incidence rate in the control group was 39/10,000; the cumulative incidence after three years was significantly lower in the blanket group (P=0.031). No difference was found between the contact and the control groups (P=0.93). Whether this apparent reduced leprosy incidence in the first three years in the blanket group is due to a delayed development of leprosy or a complete clearence of infections needs to be determined

Seroprevalence rates of antibodies to phenolic glycolipid-I among school children as an indicator of leprosy endemicity.

In order to study whether the seroprevalence of antibodies to phenolic glycolipid-I (PGL-I) among school children is a useful indicator of the leprosy problem in certain areas, school surveys were carried out. These surveys have the advantage of targeting an easily accessible, stable and standardized population. Antibodies to the species-specific PGL-I of Mycobacterium leprae were detected in a simple gelatin particle agglutination test. We have determined the seroprevalence rates in 2835 school children from five different areas in three provinces of Sulawesi, Indonesia. Three areas with a case-detection rate of over 3.4/10,000 were designated as high-endemic areas. The other two were designated as low-endemic areas, having a case-detection rate of less than 1/10,000. The seroprevalence rates in the three high-endemic areas ranged from 26% to 28% (95% CI 21%-31%). In both low-endemic areas the seroprevalence rate was 7% (95% CI 5%-10%). In a second survey conducted in one high-endemic area 3 years after the first survey, the seroprevalence rate was the same as in the first survey. These results indicate that seropositivity rates among school children may reflect the leprosy incidence. They illustrate the potential applicability of seroprevalence as an indicator of the magnitude of the leprosy problem in a selected area.

Patient contact is the major determinant in incident leprosy: implications for future control.

Notwithstanding the elimination efforts, leprosy control programs face the problem of many leprosy patients remaining undetected. Leprosy control focuses on early diagnosis through screening of household contacts, although this high-risk group generates only a small proportion of all incident cases. For the remaining incident cases, leprosy control programs have to rely on self-reporting of patients. We explored the extent to which other contact groups contribute to incident leprosy. We examined retrospectively incident leprosy over 25 years in a high-endemic village of 2283 inhabitants in Sulawesi, Indonesia, by systematically reviewing data obtained from the local program and actively gathering data through interviews and a house-to-house survey. We investigated the contact status in the past of every incident case. In addition to household contact, we distinguished neighbor and social contacts. Of the 101 incident cases over a 25-year period, 79 (78%) could be associated to contact with another leprosy patient. Twenty-eight (28%) of these 101 cases were identified as household contacts, 36 (36%) as neighbors, and the remaining 15 (15%) as social contacts. Three patients had not had a traceable previous contact with another leprosy patient, and no information could be gathered from 19 patients. The median span of time from the registration of the primary case to that of the secondary case was 3 years; 95% of the secondary cases were detected within 6 years after the primary case. The estimated risk for leprosy was about nine times higher in households of patients and four times higher in direct neighboring houses of patients compared to households that had had no such contact with patients. The highest risk of leprosy was associated with households of multibacillary patients. The risk of leprosy for households of paucibacillary patients was similar to the risk of leprosy for direct neighboring houses of multibacillary patients, indicating that both the type of leprosy of the primary case and the distance to the primary case are important contributing factors for the risk of leprosy. Contact with a leprosy patient is the major determinant in incident leprosy; the type of contact is not limited to household relationships but also includes neighbor and social relationships. This finding can be translated into a valuable and sustainable tool for leprosy control programs and elimination campaigns by focusing case detection and health promotion activities not only on household contacts but also on at least the neighbors of leprosy cases.

Choosing the decolourizer and its strength to stain Mycobacterium leprae. Does it actually matter?

Leprosy bacilli are more easily decolourized during staining than tuberculosis bacilli, so a weaker concentration of decolourizer is usually recommended. In Indonesia, the same 'strong' decolourizer is used for identifying both organisms. In a study to compare the results using different concentrations of different decolourizers, no difference could be found in the bacterial index (BI). It is suggested that the same staining technique can be used for tuberculosis and leprosy.

Evaluation of the Mycobacterium leprae particle agglutination (MLPA) test as a tool in the epidemiology of leprosy in high prevalence village in South Sulawesi, Indonesia.

This study reports on the usefulness of an IgM phenolic glycolipid-1 (PGL-1) Mycobacterium leprae particle agglutination (MLPA) test for serodiagnosis of leprosy in a prospective longitudinal community survey in a high prevalence village in South Sulawesi, Indonesia, IgM PGL-1 MLPA has simple and limited value as a screening method for detection of transmission of leprosy in the community. Many normal persons in the community in a high prevalence area had increased IgM anti PGL-1 antibodies, presumably as a consequence of early subclinical infection. In conclusion, this study demonstrated that the MLPA test can only reliably detect anti-PGL-1 antibodies in the community and may be useful for follow-up study of subclinical infection of leprosy among individuals living the an endemic area.

Distribution and persistence of Mycobacterium leprae nasal carriage among a population in which leprosy is endemic in Indonesia.

In order to understand better the relationship among Mycobacterium leprae, its transmission and the human host or the chain of infection which may lead to the development of leprosy, we performed a population survey in which nasal carriage of M. leprae was determined by a specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR), 2 years after an earlier survey in the same population. 1923 persons were registered, 1171 were clinically examined for signs of leprosy, and 418 were tested by PCR. The detection rate of leprosy in the study area had not changed significantly during the 2 years' observation period since the introduction of multi-drug therapy, i.e. 6/1000 compared to 7.7/1000 2 years before. Of 6 newly detected cases, 5 were diagnosed as having paucibacillary leprosy. The presence of M. leprae could be demonstrated by PCR in 2.9% (12/418) of the persons. PCR positivity was not persistent over the 2 years. All the PCR positive persons identified in the first survey were negative in the second, indicating that M. leprae nasal carriage is transient. As in the previous survey, we found evidence for widespread M. leprae nasal carriage as determined by PCR among the general population in an area in which leprosy is endemic. In addition, our data indicated that PCR positivity can occur in certain clusters in the community. This clustering seems to be time-dependent, not necessarily related to the presence of patients.