In Situ complement activation and T-cell immunity in leprosy spectrum: An immunohistological study on leprosy lesional skin.

Mycobacterium leprae (M. leprae) infection causes nerve damage and the condition worsens often during and long after treatment. Clearance of bacterial antigens including lipoarabinomannan (LAM) during and after treatment in leprosy patients is slow. We previously demonstrated that M. leprae LAM damages peripheral nerves by in situ generation of the membrane attack complex (MAC). Investigating the role of complement activation in skin lesions of leprosy patients might provide insight into the dynamics of in situ immune reactivity and the destructive pathology of M. leprae. In this study, we analyzed in skin lesions of leprosy patients, whether M. leprae antigen LAM deposition correlates with the deposition of complement activation products MAC and C3d on nerves and cells in the surrounding tissue. Skin biopsies of paucibacillary (n = 7), multibacillary leprosy patients (n = 7), and patients with erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL) (n = 6) or reversal reaction (RR) (n = 4) and controls (n = 5) were analyzed. The percentage of C3d, MAC and LAM deposition was significantly higher in the skin biopsies of multibacillary compared to paucibacillary patients (p = <0.05, p = <0.001 and p = <0.001 respectively), with a significant association between LAM and C3d or MAC in the skin biopsies of leprosy patients (r = 0.9578, p< 0.0001 and r = 0.8585, p<0.0001 respectively). In skin lesions of multibacillary patients, MAC deposition was found on axons and co-localizing with LAM. In skin lesions of paucibacillary patients, we found C3d positive T-cells in and surrounding granulomas, but hardly any MAC deposition. In addition, MAC immunoreactivity was increased in both ENL and RR skin lesions compared to non-reactional leprosy patients (p = <0.01 and p = <0.01 respectively). The present findings demonstrate that complement is deposited in skin lesions of leprosy patients, suggesting that inflammation driven by complement activation might contribute to nerve damage in the lesions of these patients. This should be regarded as an important factor in M. leprae nerve damage pathology.

Advances in leprosy immunology and the field application: A gap to bridge.

Advances concerning the hosts' immune response to Mycobacterium leprae infection have focused on elucidating the immune pathomechanisms involved, with the hope that predictive diagnostic and prognostic parameters (biomarkers) for field use would emerge; however, improvements in our understanding of the immunologic responses to this complex disease have, to date, somewhat failed to provide the effective and robust methods for improving its predictive diagnosis in the field situation, particularly in those patients suffering from paucibacillary disease. In this contribution we have attempted to review some of the advances both in the immunology and immunopathology of leprosy, and also highlight the limited clusters of immune parameters that are now available. Most importantly, we point out the limitations that still prevail in the provision of effective biomarkers in the field situation for either: (1) the diagnosis of indeterminate disease, (2) predictive diagnosis of individuals developing reactional states, (3) monitoring efficacy of treatment, or (4) monitoring treatment of reactional states.

Advances in leprosy immunology and the field application: a gap to bridge

Advances concerning the hosts' immune response to Mycobacterium leprae infection have focused on elucidating the immune pathomechanisms involved, with the hope that predictive diagnostic and prognostic parameters (biomarkers) for field use would emerge; however, improvements in our understanding of the immunologic responses to this complex disease have, to date, somewhat failed to provide the effective and robust methods for improving its predictive diagnosis in the field situation, particularly in those patients suffering from paucibacillary disease. In this contribution we have attempted to review some of the advances both in the immunology and immunopathology of leprosy, and also highlight the limited clusters of immune parameters that are now available. Most importantly, we point out the limitations that still prevail in the provision of effective biomarkers in the field situation for either: (1) the diagnosis of indeterminate disease, (2) predictive diagnosis of individuals developing reactional states, (3) monitoring efficacy of treatment, or (4) monitoring treatment of reactional states.

Leprosy-specific B-cells within cellular infiltrates in active leprosy lesions.

Leprosy is a spectral disease with polar lepromatous and tuberculoid forms correlating with enhanced humoral and cell-mediated immunity, respectively, against Mycobacterium leprae and the borderline forms, borderline lepromatous, midborderline, and borderline tuberculoid showing in-between clinical and immunological characteristics. Histopathologically, the cellular infiltrates of leprosy lesions show predominantly the presence of interacting T-cells and antigen presenting cells like macrophages, whereas the presence of B-cells has only been sporadically reported. The present study demonstrates by immunohistochemical techniques the presence of B-cells, including plasma cells, in active lesions from lepromatous leprosy, skin smear negative borderline lepromatous, and paucibacillary borderline tuberculoid leprosy. Furthermore, the study demonstrates the in situ production of M leprae-specific antibodies from BT lesions using an organotypic skin explant culture model. Finally, analysis of the cytokine release profile in supernatants of lesional organotypic skin cultures showed a microenvironment conducive to the differentiation and maturation of B-cells. The results demonstrate the presence of different functionally active B-cell stages within lesions of patients with leprosy, including borderline tuberculoid patients, which could secrete anti-M leprae-specific antibodies. However, their role in leprosy pathology remains to be elucidated.