Evaluation of apoptosis in skin biopsies of patients of borderline leprosy and lepra type 1 reaction.

BACKGROUND: The role of apoptosis is not clear in leprosy and lepra reactions. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate frequency of apoptosis in skin lesions of borderline leprosy and Type 1 lepra reaction. METHODS: Sixty patients with borderline leprosy (30 with clinically diagnosed Type 1 reaction (T1R) (Group I) and 30 without clinical evidence of reaction (Group II)) were analyzed in this prospective study. Apoptosis was detected by two different methods for comparison, that is, histopathologic examination (HPE) and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) fragmentation and electrophoresis. Quantification of apoptotic bodies/10 high power fields (HPF) was also done. RESULTS: Out of 30 cases, apoptosis was detected in 29 cases in Group I and 24 cases in Group II by HPE (P = 0.103), whereas, with the use of DNA electrophoresis it was detected in 24 cases in Group I and 18 cases in Group II (P = 0.091). On quantitative estimation it was found that number of apoptotic bodies are higher in Group I in comparison to Group II (2.77 vs 1.99), which is statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: There was moderate agreement (κ = 0.47) between the two methods of apoptosis detection. Apoptosis was seen more in patients with T1R both qualitatively (statistically nonsignificant) and quantitatively (statistically significant). Clinical significance of this novel finding is that apoptosis can be used as one of the variables for diagnosis of T1R to increase detection rate.

Evaluation of key histologic variables in skin biopsies of patients of borderline leprosy with type 1 lepra reaction.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy remains an important health problem mainly in the African and South-East Asia regions. Type 1 reaction is an immune-mediated phenomenon known to complicate at least 30% of patients of leprosy. Diagnosing type 1 reaction correctly is important for timely institution of therapy to prevent and treat neuropathy-associated disability and morbidity. There is paucity of literature on definitive criteria for histologic diagnosis of type 1 reaction. This study was conducted to determine the key histologic variables for diagnosing type 1 reaction. METHODS: This was a prospective study recruiting 104 patients with borderline leprosy. Three pathologists blinded to the clinical diagnosis independently assessed the cases. The agreement between each histological variable and clinical diagnosis was then calculated by using Cohen's kappa (Κ) coefficient. RESULTS: Histological diagnosis of type 1 reaction was given to 27 (67.5%) of 40 clinically diagnosed cases of type 1 reaction cases. Histological variables chosen as key variables for histological diagnosis of type 1 reaction were presence of giant cells, dermal edema, intragranuloma edema, granuloma fraction 31-50%, and presence of medium to large giant cells. CONCLUSION: This study has shown that T1R are still underdiagnosed histologically in comparison with clinical assessments. The key variables for diagnosing type 1 reaction were proposed.