Emergence and Transmission of Drug-/Multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium leprae in a Former Leprosy Colony in the Brazilian Amazon.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy has been treated with multidrug therapy, which has been distributed for free across the globe and regarded as highly efficient. However, the impossibility of growing Mycobacterium leprae in axenic media has historically impaired assessments of M. leprae resistance, a parameter only recently detectable through molecular methods. METHODS: A systematic, population-based search for M. leprae resistance in suspected leprosy relapse cases and contacts was performed in Prata Village, an isolated, hyperendemic, former leprosy colony located in the Brazilian Amazon. Results led to an extended active search involving the entire Prata population. Confirmed leprosy cases were investigated for bacterial resistance using a combination of in vivo testing and direct sequencing of resistance genes folP1, rpoB, and gyrA. A molecular epidemiology analysis was performed using data from 17 variable number tandem repeats (VNTR). RESULTS: Mycobacterium leprae was obtained from biopsies of 37 leprosy cases (18 relapses and 19 new cases): 16 (43.24%) displayed drug-resistance variants. Multidrug resistance to rifampicin and dapsone was observed in 8 relapses and 4 new cases. Single resistance to rifampicin was detected in 1 new case. Resistance to dapsone was present in 2 relapses and 1 new case. Combined molecular resistance and VNTR data revealed evidence of intra-familial primary transmission of resistant M. leprae. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive, population-based systematic approach to investigate M. leprae resistance in a unique population revealed an alarming scenario of the emergence and transmission of resistant strains. These findings may be used for the development of new strategies for surveillance of drug resistance in other populations.

An enhanced regimen as post-exposure chemoprophylaxis for leprosy: PEP+.

The ongoing transmission of Mycobacterium (M.) leprae reflected in a very slow decline in leprosy incidence, forces us to be innovative and conduct cutting-edge research. Single dose rifampicin (SDR) as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for contacts of leprosy patients, reduces their risk to develop leprosy by 60%. This is a promising new preventive measure that can be integrated into routine leprosy control programmes, as is being demonstrated in the Leprosy Post-Exposure Programme that is currently ongoing in eight countries.The limited (60%) effectiveness of SDR is likely due to the fact that some contacts have a preclinical infection beyond the early stages for which SDR is not sufficient to prevent the development of clinical signs and symptoms of leprosy. An enhanced regimen, more potent against a higher load of leprosy bacteria, would increase the effectiveness of this preventive measure significantly.The Netherlands Leprosy Relief (NLR) is developing a multi-country study aiming to show that breaking the chain of transmission of M. leprae is possible, evidenced by a dramatic reduction in incidence. In this study the assessment of the effectiveness of an enhanced prophylactic regimen for leprosy is an important component. To define the so called PEP++ regimen for this intervention study, NLR convened an Expert Meeting that was attended by clinical leprologists, public health experts, pharmacologists, dermatologists and microbiologists.The Expert Meeting advised on combinations of available drugs, with known efficacy against leprosy, as well as on the duration of the intake, aiming at a risk reduction of 80-90%. To come to a conclusion the Expert Meeting considered the bactericidal, sterilising and bacteriostatic activity of the potential drugs. The criteria used to determine an optimal enhanced regimen were: effectiveness, safety, acceptability, availability, affordability, feasibility and not inducing drug resistance.The Expert Meeting concluded that the enhanced regimen for the PEP++ study should comprise three standard doses of rifampicin 600 mg (weight adjusted when given to children) plus moxifloxacin 400 mg given at four-weekly intervals. For children and for adults with contraindications for moxifloxacin, moxifloxacin should be replaced by clarithromycin 300 mg (weight adjusted).

Human Genetic Susceptibility of Leprosy Recurrence.

Host genetic susceptibility to leprosy has been intensively investigated over the last decades; however, there are no studies on the role of genetic variants in disease recurrence. A previous initiative identified three recurrent cases of leprosy for which none of the M. leprae strains, as obtained in the first and the second diagnosis, had any known genomic variants associated to resistance to Multidrug therapy; in addition, whole genome sequencing indicated that the same M. leprae was causing two out of the three recurrences. Thus, these individuals were suspected of being particularly susceptible to M. leprae infection, either as relapse or reinfection. To verify this hypothesis, 19 genetic markers distributed across 11 loci (14 genes) classically associated with leprosy were genotyped in the recurrent and in three matching non-recurrent leprosy cases. An enrichment of risk alleles was observed in the recurrent cases, suggesting the existence of a particularly high susceptibility genetic profile among leprosy patients predisposing to disease recurrence.

Neuropathic pain in leprosy: symptom profile characterization and comparison with neuropathic pain of other etiologies.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies reported a high prevalence of neuropathic pain in leprosy, being especially present in "pharmacologically cured" patients. The presence of neuropathic pain in leprosy poses a supplementary burden in patient's quality of life, daily activities, and mood. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess whether neuropathic pain in leprosy has similar symptom profile as neuropathic pain of other etiologies and to retrospectively assess the efficacy of neuropathic pain medications regularly prescribed to leprosy. METHODS: Leprosy and nonleprosy patients had their neuropathic pain characterized by the neuropathic pain symptom inventory (NPSI, ranges from 0 to 100, with 100 being the maximal neuropathic pain intensity) in a first visit. In a second visit, leprosy patients who had significant pain and received pharmacological treatment in the first evaluation were reassessed (NPSI) and had their pain profile and treatment response further characterized, including information on drugs prescribed for neuropathic pain and their respective pain relief. RESULTS: The pain characteristics based on NPSI did not significantly differ between leprosy and nonleprosy neuropathic pain patients in visit 1 after correction for multiple analyses, and cluster analyses confirmed these findings (ie, no discrimination between leprosy and nonleprosy groups; Pearson χ2 = 0.072, P = 0.788). The assessment of pain relief response and the drugs taken by each patient, linear regression analysis showed that amitriptyline, when effective, had the highest percentage of analgesic relief. CONCLUSIONS: Neuropathic pain in leprosy is as heterogeneous as neuropathic pain of other etiologies, further supporting the concept that neuropathic pain is a transetiological entity. Neuropathic pain in leprosy may respond to drugs usually used to control pain of neuropathic profile in general, and amitriptiline may constitute a potential candidate drug for future formal clinical trials aimed at controlling neuropathic pain in leprosy.

Whole genome sequencing distinguishes between relapse and reinfection in recurrent leprosy cases.

BACKGROUND: Since leprosy is both treated and controlled by multidrug therapy (MDT) it is important to monitor recurrent cases for drug resistance and to distinguish between relapse and reinfection as a means of assessing therapeutic efficacy. All three objectives can be reached with single nucleotide resolution using next generation sequencing and bioinformatics analysis of Mycobacterium leprae DNA present in human skin. METHODOLOGY: DNA was isolated by means of optimized extraction and enrichment methods from samples from three recurrent cases in leprosy patients participating in an open-label, randomized, controlled clinical trial of uniform MDT in Brazil (U-MDT/CT-BR). Genome-wide sequencing of M. leprae was performed and the resultant sequence assemblies analyzed in silico. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In all three cases, no mutations responsible for resistance to rifampicin, dapsone and ofloxacin were found, thus eliminating drug resistance as a possible cause of disease recurrence. However, sequence differences were detected between the strains from the first and second disease episodes in all three patients. In one case, clear evidence was obtained for reinfection with an unrelated strain whereas in the other two cases, relapse appeared more probable. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This is the first report of using M. leprae whole genome sequencing to reveal that treated and cured leprosy patients who remain in endemic areas can be reinfected by another strain. Next generation sequencing can be applied reliably to M. leprae DNA extracted from biopsies to discriminate between cases of relapse and reinfection, thereby providing a powerful tool for evaluating different outcomes of therapeutic regimens and for following disease transmission.

Neuropathic pain in leprosy.

Nerve impairment is a key clinical aspect of leprosy and may present the distribution of mononeuropathy or multiple nerve trunks, small cutaneous nerve fibers, and free nerve endings. The clinical range of leprosy is determined by individual cell-mediated immune response to infection that also may play a role in different types of pain syndromes in leprosy. Previous studies reported a high prevalence of neuropathic pain in leprosy. In an Ethiopian study with 48 patients, pure nociceptive pain was experienced by 43% of patients and pure neuropathic pain (NeP) by 11% of patients. In an Indian study, 21.8% of leprosy patients had pain with neuropathic characteristics. These rates underlie the need to develop tools for the early diagnosis and detection of infection and its complications, such as nerve damage and pain. In a larger sample with leprosy-associated NeP (n = 90), we have applied the Douleur Neuropathique en 4 questions (DN4) and found sensitivity = 97.1% and specificity = 57.9%. The high sensitivity of this tool in leprosy patients suggests that it could be a valuable tool to screen for neuropathic pain in this population and could be used as part of health care programs aimed at detecting, treating, and rehabilitating leprosy in endemic areas.

Neuropathic pain in leprosy patients.

The introduction of multidrug therapy by the World Health Organization has dramatically reduced the world prevalence of leprosy but the disease is still a public health problem in many countries, with a world prevalence of almost 600,000 cases in 2001. Damage to peripheral nerves is a key component of leprosy and the sensory and motor loss that follows is the basis for many of the classical features of this disease, such as skin wounds, cracks, plantar ulcers, clawed hands, drop foot, and incomplete closure of the eyelids. One of the most remarkable aspects of leprosy to lay persons and health care workers alike is that patients are reputed to feel no pain. However, neuropathic pain is arising as a major problem among leprosy patients. It can be nociceptive due to tissue inflammation, which mostly occurs during episodes of immune activation or neuropathic due to damage or dysfunction of the nervous system. This study, conducted among 358 leprosy patients, reveals a considerable prevalence of neuropathic pain and presents evidence that this common problem should be a high priority of those in charge of leprosy control programs.

Características da doença periodontal em hanseníase / Characteristics of periodontal disease in leprosy

A hanseníase é uma doença inflamatória, crônica, granulomatosa, causada pelo Mycobacterium leprae. Ainda endêmica em alguns países em desenvolvimento, seus principais sinais clínicos são lesões de pele hipoestésicas e espessamento dos nervos periféricos. As áreas da cavidade bucal mais comumente afetadas são o palato duro, o palato mole, a úvula, os lábios, a língua e a gengiva. Entende-se por doença periodontal um conjunto de condições inflamatórias, de caráter crônico e de origem bacteriana, que começa afetando o tecido gengival e pode levar à perda dos tecidos de suporte do elemento dental. Com o objetivo de estabelecer a prevalência da doença periodontal em pacientes portadores das diferentes formas de hanseníase, foram examinados 100 pacientes hansenianos do Instituto Lauro de Souza Lima, em Bauru (SP), submetidos a exames de sondagem periodontal, nível de inserção clínica, índice de placa bacteriana, presença de sangramento gengival à sondagem, mobilidade dentária e exame radiográfico periapical como método complementar de diagnóstico. As análises estatísticas demonstraram que, assim como na população hígida, a doença periodontal foi marcadamente prevalente em adultos e idosos e em fumantes e não se encontrou nenhuma evidência de que a hanseníase seja determinante para ocorrência de doença periodontal.

Neuropathic pain in leprosy: symptom profile characterization and comparison with neuropathic pain of other etiologies

Introduction: Previous studies reported a high prevalence of neuropathic pain in leprosy, being especially present in "pharmacologically cured" patients. The presence of neuropathic pain in leprosy poses a supplementary burden in patient's quality of life, daily activities, and mood.Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess whether neuropathic pain in leprosy has similar symptom profile as neuropathic pain of other etiologies and to retrospectively assess the efficacy of neuropathic pain medications regularly prescribed to leprosy. Methods: Leprosy and nonleprosy patients had their neuropathic pain characterized by the neuropathic pain symptom inventory (NPSI, ranges from 0 to 100, with 100 being the maximal neuropathic pain intensity) in a first visit. In a second visit, leprosy patients who had significant pain and received pharmacological treatment in the first evaluation were reassessed (NPSI) and had their pain profile and treatment response further characterized, including information on drugs prescribed for neuropathic pain and their respective pain relief. Results: The pain characteristics based on NPSI did not significantly differ between leprosy and nonleprosy neuropathic pain patients in visit 1 after correction for multiple analyses, and cluster analyses confirmed these findings (ie, no discrimination between leprosy and nonleprosy groups; Pearson x2 5 0.072, P 5 0.788). The assessment of pain relief response and the drugs taken by each patient, linear regression analysis showed that amitriptyline, when effective, had the highest percentage of analgesic relief. Conclusions: Neuropathic pain in leprosy is as heterogeneous as neuropathic pain of other etiologies, further supporting the concept that neuropathic pain is a transetiological entity. Neuropathic pain in leprosy may respond to drugs usually used to control pain of neuropathic profile in general, and amitriptiline may constitute a potential candidate drug for future formal clinical trials aimed at controlling neuropathic pain in leprosy.

An enhanced regimen as post-exposure chemoprophylaxis for leprosy: PEP++

The ongoing transmission of Mycobacterium (M.) leprae reflected in a very slow decline in leprosy incidence, forces us to be innovative and conduct cutting-edge research. Single dose rifampicin (SDR) as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for contacts of leprosy patients, reduces their risk to develop leprosy by 60%. This is a promising new preventive measure that can be integrated into routine leprosy control programmes, as is being demonstrated in the Leprosy Post-Exposure Programme that is currently ongoing in eight countries.The limited (60%) effectiveness of SDR is likely due to the fact that some contacts have a preclinical infection beyond the early stages for which SDR is not sufficient to prevent the development of clinical signs and symptoms of leprosy. An enhanced regimen, more potent against a higher load of leprosy bacteria, would increase the effectiveness of this preventive measure significantly.The Netherlands Leprosy Relief (NLR) is developing a multi-country study aiming to show that breaking the chain of transmission of M. leprae is possible, evidenced by a dramatic reduction in incidence. In this study the assessment of the effectiveness of an enhanced prophylactic regimen for leprosy is an important component. To define the so called PEP++ regimen for this intervention study, NLR convened an Expert Meeting that was attended by clinical leprologists, public health experts, pharmacologists, dermatologists and microbiologists.The Expert Meeting advised on combinations of available drugs, with known efficacy against leprosy, as well as on the duration of the intake, aiming at a risk reduction of 80-90%. To come to a conclusion the Expert Meeting considered the bactericidal, sterilising and bacteriostatic activity of the potential drugs. The criteria used to determine an optimal enhanced regimen were: effectiveness, safety, acceptability, availability, affordability, feasibility and not inducing drug resistance.The Expert Meeting concluded that the enhanced regimen for the PEP++ study should comprise three standard doses of rifampicin 600 mg (weight adjusted when given to children) plus moxifloxacin 400 mg given at four-weekly intervals. For children and for adults with contraindications for moxifloxacin, moxifloxacin should be replaced by clarithromycin 300 mg (weight adjusted).