The effects of prednisolone treatment on serological responses and lipid profiles in Ethiopian leprosy patients with Erythema Nodosum Leprosum reactions.

BACKGROUND: Erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL) is a systemic inflammatory complication occurring mainly in patients with lepromatous leprosy (LL) and borderline lepromatous leprosy (BL). Prednisolone is widely used for treatment of ENL reactions. However, it has been reported that prolonged treatment with prednisolone increases the risk for prednisolone-induced complications such as osteoporosis, diabetes, cataract and arteriosclerosis. It has been speculated that perhaps these complications result from lipid profile alterations by prednisolone. The effects of extended prednisolone treatment on lipid profiles in ENL patients have not been studied in leprosy patients with ENL reactions. Therefore, in this study we conducted a case-control study to investigate the changes in lipid profiles and serological responses in Ethiopian patients with ENL reaction after prednisolone treatment. METHODS: A prospective matched case-control study was employed to recruit 30 patients with ENL and 30 non-reactional LL patient controls at ALERT Hospital, Ethiopia. Blood samples were obtained from each patient with ENL reaction before and after prednisolone treatment as well as from LL controls. The serological host responses to PGL-1, LAM and Ag85 M. leprae antigens were measured by ELISA. Total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high density lipoprotein (HDL) and low density lipoprotein (LDL) were measured by spectrophotometric method. RESULTS: The host antibody response to M. leprae PGL-1, LAM and Ag85 antigens were significantly reduced in patients with ENL reactions compared to LL controls after treatment. Comparison between patients with acute and chronic ENL showed that host-response to PGL-1 was significantly reduced in chronic ENL after prednisolone treatment. Untreated patients with ENL reactions had low lipid concentration compared to LL controls. However, after treatment, both groups had comparable lipid profiles except for LDL, which was significantly higher in patients with ENL reaction. Comparison within the ENL group before and after treatment showed that prednisolone significantly increased LDL and HDL levels in ENL patients and this was more prominent in chronic ENL than in acute patients with ENL. CONCLUSION: The significantly increased prednisolone-induced LDL and TG levels, particularly in patients with chronic ENL reactions, is a concern in the use of prednisolone for extended periods in ENL patients. The findings highlight the importance of monitoring lipid profiles during treatment of patients to minimize the long-term risk of prednisolone-induced complications.

Effect of intravenous pulse dexamethasone versus daily oral prednisolone on bone mineral density in dermatology patients: Is it a site-specific response?

BACKGROUND: The use of glucocorticoids in various forms of administration is complicated by their systemic side effects. Although intravenous pulse therapy is considered to have lesser systemic side effects, there are few studies in literature comparing the effects of intravenous pulse glucocorticoids versus oral daily glucocorticoids on bone mineral density. AIM: To compare the effects of intravenous pulse glucocorticoids and oral daily glucocorticoids on bone mineral density with the aim of finding any site-specific osteopenic side effect. METHODS: The study was conducted by the department of dermatology of Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India. The study comprised of two groups of patients. Group A consisted of 28 patients with pemphigus vulgaris who received intravenous pulses of dexamethasone at 4 weekly intervals. Group B consisted of 21 patients with airborne contact dermatitis who received oral daily prednisolone therapy. All the patients had a dual X-ray absorptiometry scan at baseline, and at 3 and 6 months of follow-up. The results were analyzed as changes in bone mineral density. RESULTS: There was loss of bone mineral density at lumbar spine and the head of radius in both the groups. At the lumbar spine, Group B showed more reduction in bone mineral density at 3 months whereas in Group A it was more at the head of radius. In patients on oral steroids, the lumbar spine was significantly more affected than the head of radius at both 3 and 6 months of follow-up. However, in patients on intravenous pulse steroids, both the sites were equally affected at 3 and 6 months. LIMITATIONS: In our study, we used different glucocorticoids in the two groups: prednisolone in the oral daily group and dexamethasone in the intravenous pulse steroids group. A similar reduction in bone mineral density in both the groups may have been due to a longer half-life or more bone-directed side effects of dexamethasone as compared to prednisolone. CONCLUSION: Dermatologists need to be aware of the detrimental effects of high-dose intravenous pulsed glucocorticoids on bone mineral density and assessment of this parameter should be done before the initiation of therapy and also at regular intervals thereafter. During follow up, either the lumbar spine or the head of radius can be used to assess the osteopenic effect of intravenous pulse steroids, whereas the lumbar spine is a better site for this evaluation in patients on oral steroids.

Effectiveness of 32 versus 20 weeks of prednisolone in leprosy patients with recent nerve function impairment: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: While prednisolone is commonly used to treat recent nerve function impairment (NFI) in leprosy patients, the optimal treatment duration has not yet been established. In this "Treatment of Early Neuropathy in Leprosy" (TENLEP) trial, we evaluated whether a 32-week prednisolone course is more effective than a 20-week course in restoring and improving nerve function. METHODS: In this multi-centre, triple-blind, randomized controlled trial, leprosy patients who had recently developed clinical NFI (<6 months) were allocated to a prednisolone treatment regimen of either 20 weeks or 32 weeks. Prednisolone was started at either 45 or 60 mg/day, depending on the patient's body weight, and was then tapered. Throughout follow up, NFI was assessed by voluntary muscle testing and monofilament testing. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with improved or restored nerve function at week 78. As secondary outcomes, we analysed improvements between baseline and week 78 on the Reaction Severity Scale, the SALSA Scale and the Participation Scale. Serious Adverse Events and the need for additional prednisolone treatment were monitored and reported. RESULTS: We included 868 patients in the study, 429 in the 20-week arm and 439 in the 32-week arm. At 78 weeks, the proportion of patients with improved or restored nerve function did not differ significantly between the groups: 78.1% in the 20-week arm and 77.5% in the 32-week arm (p = 0.821). Nor were there any differences in secondary outcomes, except for a significant higher proportion of Serious Adverse Events in the longer treatment arm. CONCLUSION: In our study, a 20-week course of prednisolone was as effective as a 32-week course in improving and restoring recent clinical NFI in leprosy patients. Twenty weeks is therefore the preferred initial treatment duration for leprosy neuropathy, after which likely only a minority of patients require further individualized treatment.

AZALEP a randomized controlled trial of azathioprine to treat leprosy nerve damage and Type 1 reactions in India: Main findings.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy Type 1 reactions are difficult to treat and only 70% of patients respond to steroid treatment. Azathioprine has been used as an immune-suppressant and we tested its efficacy in treating leprosy T1R. METHODOLOGY: Randomised controlled trial adding azathioprine to steroid treatment for leprosy reactions. This trial was conducted in four leprosy hospitals in India. Patients with a new leprosy Type 1 reaction affecting either skin or nerve were recruited. They were given a 20 week course of oral prednisolone either with placebo or azathioprine 50mg for 24, 36 or 48 weeks. Outcomes were measured using a verified combined clinical reaction severity score (CCS) and the score difference between baseline and end of study calculated. An intention to treat analysis was done on the 279 patients who had an outcome. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: 345 patients were recruited, 145 were lost due to adverse events, loss to follow up or death. 36% needed extra steroids due to a recurrence of their skin and/or nerve reaction. 76% of patients had improvements in their CCS the end of the study, 22% had no change and 1.1% deteriorated. Adding azathioprine to steroid treatment did not improve CCS. So the improvements were attributable to treatment with steroids. We analysed the skin, sensory and motor scores separately and found that skin improvement contributed most with 78.9% of patients having skin improvement, azathioprine treatment for 48 weeks improved sensory scores it also improved motor scores but so did treatment with prednisolone alone. We identified significant adverse effects attributable to steroid treatment. When azathioprine and Dapsone were given together significant numbers of patients developed significant anaemia. CONCLUSIONS: Azathioprine is not recommended for the treatment of leprosy reactions and does not improve steroid treatment. Recurrent reactions are a major challenge. We have also identified that 65% of patients with sensory and 50% with motor nerve damage do not improve. Future studies should test giving azathioprine in the treatment of nerve damage and giving a higher dose for 48 weeks to patients. These findings highlight the difficulty in switching off leprosy inflammation and the need for better treatments for reactions and nerve damage. There is also a research need to identify patients who have recurrences and optimize treatments for them. Patients with recurrences may benefit from combined treatment with steroids and azathioprine. We have also shown that significant numbers of patients treated with steroids develop adverse effects and this needs to be highlighted in leprosy programmes. Research is needed to identify patients who do not respond to steroid treatment and develop alternative treatments for them. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov This trial was registered with the Indian Council of Medical research clinical Trial register as a clinical trial Number-REFCTRI/2016/12/007558.

Management of chronic neuritis with a combination regimen of lower doses prednisolone and methotrexate: a brief report.

INTRODUCTION: Recommended fixed duration prednisolone regimen was not found effective in the treatment of chronic neuritis. Alternate effective treatment was being sought to reduce the deformity in the field of leprosy. OBJECTIVE: We wished to see whether a prolonged course of prednisolone and methotrexate could be of any help for them. METHODOLOGY: In 2012-2014, an open pilot clinical study was undertaken where three chronic neuritic patients were treated with lower doses prednisolone and methotrexate for 12 months and a follow up period was delivered for 12 months. The study was undertaken in one of the outdoor clinics of the university. RESULTS: Complete and permanent remission of neuritis was achieved with appreciable functional recovery. Few mild self-limiting side-effects from prednisolone were observed and there was no side-effects from methotrexate. CONCLUSION: Prolonged course of prednisolone and methotrexate was found safe and effective in treating chronic neuritis.

Corticosteroids for treating nerve damage in leprosy.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy causes nerve damage that can result in nerve function impairment and disability. Corticosteroids are commonly used for treating nerve damage, although their long-term effect is uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in 2007, and previously updated in 2009 and 2011. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of corticosteroids on nerve damage in leprosy. SEARCH METHODS: On 16 June 2015, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, and LILACS. We also checked clinical trials registers and contacted trial authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of corticosteroids for nerve damage in leprosy. The comparators were no treatment, placebo treatment, or a different corticosteroid regimen. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was improvement in nerve function after one year. Secondary outcomes were change in nerve pain, limitations in activities of daily living, limitations in participation, and adverse events. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. When data were lacking, we contacted trial authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs involving 576 people. The trials were largely at low risk of bias, but we considered the quality of the evidence from these trials as moderate to low, largely due to imprecision from small sample sizes. Two out of the five trials reported on improvement in nerve function at one year. These two trials compared prednisolone with placebo. One trial, with 84 participants, treated mild sensory impairment of less than six months' duration, and the other, with 95 participants, treated nerve function impairment of 6 to 24 months' duration. There was no significant difference in nerve function improvement after 12 months between people treated with prednisolone and those treated with placebo. Adverse events were not reported significantly more often with corticosteroids than with placebo. The other three trials did not report on the primary outcome measure. One (334 participants) compared three corticosteroid regimens for severe type 1 reactions. No serious side effects of steroids were reported in any participant during the follow-up period. Another trial (21 participants) compared low-dose prednisone with high-dose prednisone for ulnar neuropathy. Two participants on the higher dose of prednisone reported adverse effects. The last (42 participants) compared intravenous methylprednisolone and oral prednisolone with intravenous normal saline and oral prednisolone. The trial found no significant differences between the groups in the occurrence of adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Corticosteroids are used for treating acute nerve damage in leprosy, but moderate-quality evidence from two RCTs treating either longstanding or mild nerve function impairment did not show corticosteroids to have a superior effect to placebo on nerve function improvement. A third trial showed significant benefit from a five-month steroid regimen over a three-month regimen in terms of response to treatment (need for additional corticosteroids). Further RCTs are needed to establish optimal corticosteroid regimens and to examine the efficacy and safety of adjuvant or new therapies for treating nerve damage in leprosy. Future trials should address non-clinical aspects, such as costs and impact on quality of life, which are highly relevant indicators for both policymakers and participants.

A Randomized Controlled Double Blind Trial of Ciclosporin versus Prednisolone in the Management of Leprosy Patients with New Type 1 Reaction, in Ethiopia.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy Type 1 (T1R) reactions are immune-mediated events leading to nerve damage and preventable disability affecting hands, feet and eyes. Type 1 Reactions are treated with oral corticosteroids. There is little evidence on alternative treatments for patients who do not respond to steroids or experience steroid adverse effects. We report the results of a randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy and adverse effect profile of ciclosporin and prednisolone (CnP) in comparison to prednisolone only (P) in patients with new T1R in Ethiopia. Ciclosporin is a potent immunosuppressant. Outcomes were measured using a clinical severity score, recurrence rate, adverse events and quality of life. RESULTS: Seventy three patients with new T1R were randomized to receive CnP or P for 20 weeks. Recovery rates in skin signs was similar in both groups (91% vs 88%). Improvements in nerve function both, new and old, sensory (66% vs 49%) and motor (75% vs 74%) loss were higher (but not significantly so) in the patients on CnP. Recurrences rates of T1R (85%) were high in both groups, and recurrences occurred significantly earlier (8 weeks) in patients CnP, who needed 10% more additional prednisolone. Serious major and minor adverse events rates were similar in patients in the two treatment arms of the study. Both groups had a significant improvement in their quality of life after the study, measured by the SF-36. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first double-blind RCT assessing ciclosporin, in the management of T1R in Africa. Ciclosporin could be a safe alternative second-line drug for patients with T1R who are not improving with prednisolone or are experiencing adverse events related to prednisolone. This study illustrates the difficulty in switching off leprosy inflammation. Better treatment agents for leprosy patients with reactions and nerve damage are needed.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Ciclosporin to Prednisolone in the Treatment of Erythema Nodosum Leprosum: Two Randomised, Double Blind, Controlled Pilot Studies in Ethiopia.

BACKGROUND: Erythema Nodosum Leprosum (ENL) is a serious complication of leprosy. It is normally treated with high dose steroids, but its recurrent nature leads to prolonged steroid usage and associated side effects. There is little evidence on the efficacy of alternative treatments for ENL, especially for patients who have become steroid resistant or have steroid side effects. These two pilot studies compare the efficacy and side effect profile of ciclosporin plus prednisolone against prednisolone alone in the treatment of patients with either new ENL or chronic and recurrent ENL. METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirteen patients with new ENL and twenty patients with chronic ENL were recruited into two double-blinded randomised controlled trials. Patients were randomised to receive ciclosporin and prednisolone or prednisolone treatment only. Patients with acute ENL had a delay of 16 weeks in the occurrence of ENL flare-up episode, with less severe flare-ups and decreased requirements for additional prednisolone. Patients with chronic ENL on ciclosporin had the first episode of ENL flare-up 4 weeks earlier than those on prednisolone, as well as more severe ENL flare-ups requiring 2.5 times more additional prednisolone. Adverse events attributable to prednisolone were more common that those attributable to ciclosporin. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first clinical trial on ENL management set in the African context, and also the first trial in leprosy to use patients' assessment of outcomes. Patients on ciclosporin showed promising results in the management of acute ENL in this small pilot study. But ciclosporin, did not appear to have a significant steroid-sparing effects in patients with chronic ENL, which may have been due to the prolonged use of steroids in these patients in combination with a too rapid decrease of steroids in patients given ciclosporin. Further research is needed to determine whether the promising results of ciclosporin in acute ENL can be reproduced on a larger scale.

Isolated cutaneous involvement in a child with nodal anaplastic large cell lymphoma.

Non-Hodgkin lymphoma is a common childhood T-cell and B-cell neoplasm that originates primarily from lymphoid tissue. Cutaneous involvement can be in the form of a primary extranodal lymphoma, or secondary to metastasis from a non-cutaneous location. The latter is uncommon, and isolated cutaneous involvement is rarely reported. We report a case of isolated secondary cutaneous involvement from nodal anaplastic large cell lymphoma (CD30 + and ALK +) in a 7-year-old boy who was on chemotherapy. This case is reported for its unusual clinical presentation as an acute febrile, generalized papulonodular eruption that mimicked deep fungal infection, with the absence of other foci of systemic metastasis.

Optic nerve involvement in a borderline lepromatous leprosy patient on multidrug therapy.

Amidst the plethora of ocular complications of leprosy, involvement of the posterior segment or optic nerve is extremely rare. The mechanism of optic neuritis in leprosy is poorly understood. A 47 year-old man presented with a single lesion suggestive of mid-borderline (BB) leprosy over left periorbital region; the histology showed borderline lepromatous (BL) leprosy with a BI of 3+. After initial improvement with WHO MDT-MB and prednisolone (40 mg/d) he developed sudden and painless diminished vision in the left eye, about 3 weeks later. His visual acuity was 6/9 in the left and 6/6 in the right eye, and there was left optic disc edema, hyperemia and blurred disc margins. Treatment with prednisolone (60 mg/d) along with WHO MDT-MB continued. A month later he returned with painless diminished vision in the other eye as well. Visual acuity was 6/6 in the right and 6/12 in the left eye, and there was right optic disc edema and left optic disc atrophy. CT of the head and MRI of the brain were normal. Inflammatory edema of the orbital connective tissue or other surrounding structures, or direct infiltration of vasa nervosa with resultant vascular occlusion leading to optic nerve ischemia, seems the most plausible explanation of optic nerve involvement in this case.

Two randomized controlled clinical trials to study the effectiveness of prednisolone treatment in preventing and restoring clinical nerve function loss in leprosy: the TENLEP study protocols.

BACKGROUND: Nerve damage in leprosy often causes disabilities and deformities. Prednisolone is used to treat nerve function impairment (NFI). However, optimal dose and duration of prednisolone treatment has not been established yet. Besides treating existing NFI it would be desirable to prevent NFI. Studies show that before NFI is clinically detectable, nerves often show subclinical damage. Within the 'Treatment of Early Neuropathy in LEProsy' (TENLEP) study two double blind randomized controlled trials (RCT) will be carried out: a trial to establish whether prednisolone treatment of 32 weeks duration is more effective than 20 weeks in restoring nerve function in leprosy patients with clinical NFI (Clinical trial) and a trial to determine whether prednisolone treatment of early sub-clinical NFI can prevent clinical NFI (Subclinical trial). METHODS: Two RCTs with a follow up of 18 months will be conducted in six centers in Asia. In the Clinical trial leprosy patients with recent (< 6 months) clinical NFI, as determined by Monofilament Test and Voluntary Muscle Test, are included. The primary outcomes are the proportion of patients with restored or improved nerve function. In the Subclinical trial leprosy patients with subclinical neuropathy, as determined by Nerve Conduction Studies (NCS) and/or Warm Detection Threshold (WDT), and without any clinical signs of NFI are randomly allocated to a placebo group or treatment group receiving 20 weeks prednisolone. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients developing clinical NFI. Reliability and normative studies are carried out before the start of the trial. DISCUSSION: This study is the first RCT testing a prednisolone regimen with a duration longer than 24 weeks. Also it is the first RCT assessing the effect of prednisolone in the prevention of clinical NFI in patients with established subclinical neuropathy. The TENLEP study will add to the current understanding of neuropathy due to leprosy and provide insight in the effectiveness of prednisolone on the prevention and recovery of NFI in leprosy patients. In this paper we present the research protocols for both Clinical and Subclinical trials and discuss the possible findings and implications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register: NTR2300 Clinical Trial Registry India: CTRI/2011/09/002022.