Synergistic antigen combinations for the development of interferon gamma release assays for paucibacillary leprosy

Transcriptomic Analysis of Mycobacterium leprae-Stimulated Response in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells Reveal Potential Biomarkers for Early Diagnosis of Leprosy

We aimed to identify an unique host transcriptional signature in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) in response to Mycobacterium leprae antigens to distinguish between patients with leprosy and non-leprosy controls for early diagnosis of the disease. Sixteen individuals were enrolled in the discovery cohort [eight patients with leprosy, comprising four multibacillary (MB) and four paucibacillary (PB); and eight non-leprosy controls, comprising four healthy house contacts (HHCs) and four endemic controls (ECs)]. The differences in the transcriptome response of PBMCs to M. leprae sonicate antigen were evaluated between leprosy patients and non-leprosy controls, and 12 differentially expressed genes (CCL2/MCP-1, IL-8, JAKM, ATP, ND1, SERP, FLJ10489, LINC00659, LOC34487, LOC101928143, MIR22, and NCF1C) were identified. The accuracy of the 12 differentially expressed genes was further validated for the diagnosis of leprosy using real-time quantitative PCR in 82 individuals (13 MB, 10 PB, 37 HHCs, and 22 ECs) in the validation cohort. We found that a 5 gene signature set IL-8, CCL2/MCP-1, SERP, LINC00659 and FLJ10489 had a suitable performance in discriminating leprosy from ECs. In addition, elevated expression of IL-8, CCL2/MCP-1, SERP and LINC00659 was associated with MB diagnosis compared with ECs, whereas increased expression of IL-8, CCL2/MCP-1, SERP and FLJ10489 was found to be useful biomarkers for PB diagnosis from ECs. Moreover, we found decreased expression of NCF1C among leprosy patients could distinguish leprosy from HHCs, whereas higher expression of CCL2 among MB than PB could distinguish different leprosy patients. In conclusion, among the 12 candidate host genes identified, a three gene signature IL-8, CCL2/MCP-1, and SERP showed the best performance in distinguishing leprosy patients from healthy controls. These findings may have implications for developing a rapid blood-based test for early diagnosis of leprosy.

Leprosy surveillance study in a highly endemic Brazilian area using leprosy specific serologic tests and IFNγ whole blood assay

This surveillance study evaluated leprosy-serologic tests and the IFNγ whole-blood-assay/WBA as adjunct diagnostic tools. Previously diagnosed leprosy index cases, intradomiciliary, peridomiciliary contacts from a Brazilian endemic area were enrolled during domiciliary visits. Physical evaluation was performed by trained nurses and leprosy diagnosis confirmed by expert dermatologist. ELISA detected IgM anti-PGL-I, IgG anti-LID-1, and IgM/IgG anti-ND-O-LID antibodies. Heparinized WBA plasma stimulated with LID-1, 46f + LID-1, ML0276 + LID-1 (24 h, 37 °C, 5% CO₂₎ was tested for human IFNγ (QuantiFERON®-TB Gold/QFT-G; Qiagen). The survey included 1731 participants: 44 leprosy index cases, 64 intradomiciliary, 1623 peridomiciliary contacts. Women represented 57.7%, median age was 32 years, 72.2% had BCG scar. Leprosy prevalence was higher in intradomiciliary (8.57%) versus peridomiciliary contacts (0.67%), p < 0.001. Among 23 suspects, five leprosy cases were confirmed: 4 multibacillary/MB and 1 paucibacillary/PB. Leprosy incidence was 0.30%: 1.56% in intradomiciliary versus 0.25% in peridomiciliary (p = 0.028). Seropositivity rates were 1.9% to PGL-I, 4.9% to LID-1, and 1.0% to ND-O-LID. LID-1 positivity was higher in all groups; incident cases were LID-1 seropositive. ND-O-LID positivity was higher in intra- versus peridomiciliary contacts (p = 0.022). IFNγ WBA (40 index cases, 19 suspects, 35 intradomiciliary, 74 peridomiciliary contacts) showed higher LID-1/WBA positivity in peridomiciliary contacts (p > 0.05); significant differences among groups were seen with 46f + LID-1 but 0276 + LID-1 induced higher IFNγ levels. Incident cases were LID-1 seropositive, while IFNγ-WBA had marginal diagnostic application. As seropositivity indicates exposed individuals at higher risk of disease development, the utility of serologic screening for surveillance and prophylactic measures remains to be demonstrated.

Diagnosis of mycobacterial skin infections

The diagnosis of cutaneous mycobacterial infections may be challenging. Owing to the broad spectrum of their clinical presentations, mycobacterioses have to be considered as differential diagnoses to many inflammatory dermatoses. Diagnostic measures comprise histology including special staining, cultures and molecular microbiological examinations as well as the detection of cellular immune reactions of the patient by means of interferon-γ release assays and skin testing. Clinicians should know the appropriate use and combination of procedures to diagnose mycobacterioses quickly and correctly and to avoid costs and delays caused by unnecessary examinations. This mini review summarizes advantages, limitations, and pitfalls of diagnostic methods for mycobacterial skin infections.

Diagnostic accuracy of tests for leprosy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Owing to difficulties in the clinical diagnosis of leprosy, several complementary tests have been developed and used. The aim was to systematically summarize the accuracy of diagnostic tests for leprosy.

METHODS

We searched for relevant articles in Embase, Medline, and Global Health databases, until June 2017. Studies evaluating the accuracy of any diagnostic techniques for differentiating between people with and without leprosy were included. Studies solely focusing on differentiating between the separate forms of leprosy were excluded. Our protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42017071803). We assessed study quality using the QUADAS-2 checklist. A bivariate random effects regression model was used for the meta-analyses.

RESULTS

We included 78 studies, most of those evaluating the detection of IgM antibodies against phenolic glycolipid I using ELISA. Sensitivity of the 39 studies evaluating ELISA was 63.8% (95% CI 55.0-71.8); specificity 91.0% (95% CI 86.9-93.9). The lateral flow test (nine studies) and the agglutination test (five studies) had a slightly higher sensitivity and a slightly lower specificity. Sensitivity of qPCR was (five studies) 78.5% (95% CI 61.9-89.2) and specificity 89.3% (95% CI 61.4-97.8). Sensitivity of conventional PCR was (17 studies) 75.3% (95% CI 67.9-81.5) and specificity 94.5% (95% CI 91.4-96.5).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the test accuracy looks reasonable, the studies suffered from heterogeneity and low methodological quality.

Host immune responses induced by specific Mycobacterium leprae antigens in an overnight whole-blood assay correlate with the diagnosis of paucibacillary leprosy patients in China

BACKGROUND

Leprosy, caused by Mycobacterium leprae, affects over 200,000 people annually worldwide and remains endemic in the ethnically diverse, mountainous and underdeveloped southwestern provinces of China. Delayed diagnosis of leprosy persists in China, thus, additional knowledge to support early diagnosis, especially early diagnosis of paucibacillary (PB) patients, based on the host immune responses induced by specific M. leprae antigens is needed. The current study aimed to investigate leprosy patients and controls in Southwest China by comparing supernatants after stimulation with specific M. leprae antigens in an overnight whole-blood assay (WBA) to determine whether host markers induced by specific M. leprae antigens improve the diagnosis or discrimination of PB patients with leprosy.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Leprosy patients [13 multibacillary (MB) patients and 7 PB patients] and nonleprosy controls [21 healthy household contacts (HHCs), 20 endemic controls (ECs) and 19 tuberculosis (TB) patients] were enrolled in this study. The supernatant levels of ten host markers stimulated by specific M. leprae antigens were evaluated by overnight WBA and multiplex Luminex assays. The diagnostic value in PB patients and ECs and the discriminatory value between PB patients and HHCs or TB patients were evaluated by receiver operator characteristics (ROC) analysis. ML2044-stimulated CXCL8/IL-8 achieved the highest sensitivity of 100%, with a specificity of 73.68%, for PB diagnosis. Compared to single markers, a 3-marker combination model that included ML2044-induced CXCL8/IL-8, CCL4/MIP-1 beta, and IL-6 improved the diagnostic specificity to 94.7% for PB patients. ML2044-stimulated IL-4 and CXCL8/IL-8 achieved the highest sensitivity (85.71% and 100%) and the highest specificity (95.24% and 84.21%) for discriminating PB patients from HHCs and TB patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the host markers induced by specific M. leprae antigens in an overnight WBA increase diagnostic and discriminatory value in PB patients with leprosy, with a particularly strong association with interleukin 8.

Evaluation of antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China.

METHODS

Eighty-three leprosy patients and 161 non-leprosy controls were enrolled from Hani-yi Autonomous Prefecture of Honghe, Yunnan Province, China. Leprosy patients were divided into multibacillary (MB, n = 38), paucibacillary (PB, n = 23), and post-multi-drug therapy (MDT, n = 22) groups. Controls were divided into the following groups: healthy household contacts (HHC, n = 119), tuberculosis (TB, n = 11), and endemic controls (EC, n = 31). The NDO-LID Rapid Test, M. leprae antigen-specific ELISA and antigen-specific IFN-γ secretion in a whole blood assay (WBA) were used to evaluate these subjects.

RESULTS

The NDO-LID Rapid Test achieved higher positive response rates in MB than in PB patients[94.7%(36/38) vs 65.2%(15/23)], and these rates were higher than those observed by ELISA using anti-LID-1[92.1%(35/38) vs 52.2%(12/23)], anti-NDO-LID[92.1%(35/38) vs 47.8% (11/23)], and anti-ND-O-BSA[89.5%(34/38) vs 60.9%(14/23)]. However, the NDO-LID Rapid Test also showed a higher positive response rate in the EC group (33.3%,10/31), which was higher than the rates observed for anti-NDO-LID (12.9%,4/31) and anti-ND-O-BSA (16.1%,5/31). M. leprae antigen-specific ELISA demonstrated relatively high specificity (86.84-97.37%) but low sensitivity (15.97-72.73%) in discriminating between leprosy patients and non-leprosy controls by ROC curve analysis. In contrast, M. leprae antigen-specific IFN-γ secretion detection achieved higher positive response rates in PB than in MB patients (positive ratio of MB vs PB: 40% vs 56% for LID-1, 28.6% vs 47.8% for ML89, 31.4% vs 60.7% for ML2044, and 31.4 vs 47.8% for ML2028) and could distinguish MB from EC when stimulated with ML89(AUC = 0.6664) and PB fromTB when stimulated with ML2044 and ML2028(AUC = 0.7549 and 0.7372, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The NDO-LID Rapid Test and M. leprae antigen-specific ELISA are useful tools to assist in the diagnosis of leprosy patients, especially MB patients, although the former had higher sensitivity but lower specificity than the latter. M. leprae antigen-specific IFN-γ release assessed by WBA has diagnostic value for distinguishing PB from TB but not for distinguishing PB from HHC or EC. Screening novel M. leprae-specific antigens, combining different M. leprae antigens and a multi-cytokine analyte model may be needed for more effective diagnosis of leprosy.

Keim oder kein Keim: Herausforderungen bei der Diagnose mykobakterieller Infektionen der Haut

Kutane Mykobakteriosen sind in Deutschland selten. Dennoch ist es für eine frühzeitige Diagnose und anschließende wirksame Behandlung erforderlich, dass diese Krankheitsbilder im ärztlichen Bewusstsein verankert sind. Darüber hinaus stehen Infektionen mit Mykobakterien auf der Liste der Differentialdiagnosen vieler Hautkrankheiten. Diagnosen kutaner Mykobakteriosen beruhen auf klinischen Merkmalen und auf Laboruntersuchungen, einschließlich bakterieller Kulturen, histopathologischer Untersuchungen und PCR-basierten Verfahren. Das Wissen um Möglichkeiten und Grenzen dieser Laboruntersuchungen ist von zentraler Bedeutung, um eine angemessene klinische Entscheidung zu treffen. In diesem Beitrag diskutieren wir die aktuellen diagnostischen Möglichkeiten, die in Verdachtsfällen kutaner Mykobakteriosen zur Verfügung stehen.

Combination chemoprophylaxis and immunoprophylaxis in reducing the incidence of leprosy

Leprosy is a complex infectious disease caused by Mycobacterium leprae that is a leading cause of nontraumatic peripheral neuropathy. Current control strategies, with a goal of early diagnosis and treatment in the form of multidrug therapy, have maintained new case reports at ~225,000 per year. Diagnostic capabilities are limited and even with revisions to multidrug therapy regimen, treatment can still require up to a year of daily drug intake. Although alternate chemotherapies or adjunct immune therapies that could provide shorter or simpler treatment regimen appear possible, only a limited number of trials have been conducted. More proactive strategies appear necessary in the drive to elimination. As a prevention strategy, most chemoprophylaxis campaigns to date have provided about a 2-year protective window. Vaccination, in the form of a single bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) immunization, generally provides ~50% reduction in leprosy cases. Adapting control strategies to provide both chemoprophylaxis and immunoprophylaxis has distinct appeal, with chemoprophylaxis theoretically buttressed by vaccination to generate immediate protection that can be sustained in the long term. We also discuss simple assays measuring biomarkers as surrogates for disease development or replacements for invasive, but not particularly sensitive, direct measures of M. leprae infection. Such assays could facilitate the clinical trials required to develop these new chemoprophylaxis, immunoprophylaxis strategies, and transition into wider use.

Quantiferon-Gold Tuberculosis Test Cannot Detect Latent Tuberculosis in Patients With Leprosy

Five of 10 paucibacillary leprosy patients were Quantiferon Gold (Q-G) positive with negative chest X-rays. Forty multibacillary leprosy patients were negative. Reports have shown 100% cross-reactivity of ESAT6 and CFP10 between Mycobacterium leprae and Mycobacterium tuberculosis. The Q-G test cannot detect latent tuberculosis in patients with leprosy.

Evaluation of novel tools to facilitate the detection and characterization of leprosy patients in China

Leprosy is the disabling outcome of chronic infection with Mycobacterium leprae. The disease often evades early detection, particularly now that fewer clinicians are able to confidently diagnose the disease following the integration of leprosy control measures within general health services in many countries. Although leprosy is officially eliminated in China, endemic regions remain in some difficult-to-reach, underdeveloped areas in Southwest China. In order to better understand the extent of M. leprae infection and identify new leprosy cases in a timely manner, simple tools that can detect infection and the early disease are required. In this report we evaluated the performance of antigen-specific ELISA, the NDO-LID rapid diagnostic test, and antigen-specific whole blood assays (WBA) as potential diagnostic tools. Our data support the use of antibody detection tests and WBA to facilitate the diagnosis of multibacillary and paucibacillary leprosy, respectively. These tools could be invaluable for increased, but simplified, monitoring of individuals in order to provide referrals for clinical exam and early leprosy diagnosis.