Application of Mycobacterium Leprae-specific cellular and serological tests for the differential diagnosis of leprosy from confounding dermatoses

Challenges and advances in serological and molecular tests to aid leprosy diagnosis

Leprosy is a neglected chronic infectious disease caused by obligate intracellular bacilli, Mycobacterium leprae and Mycobacterium lepromatosis. Despite multidrug therapy (MDT) success, leprosy accounts for more than 200,000 new cases yearly. Leprosy diagnosis remains based on the dermato-neurologic examination, but histopathology of skin biopsy and bacilloscopy of intradermal scraping are subsidiary diagnostic tests that require expertise and laboratory infrastructure. This minireview summarizes the state of the art of serologic tests to aid leprosy diagnosis, highlighting enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and point-of-care tests (POCT) biotechnologies. Also, the impact of the postgenomic era on the description of new recombinantly expressed M. leprae-specific protein antigens, such as leprosy Infectious Disease Research Institute (IDRI) diagnostic (LID)-1 is summarized. Highly specific and sensitive molecular techniques to detect M. leprae DNA as the quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and the loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) are briefly reviewed. Serology studies using phenolic glycolipid-I (PGL-I) semi-synthetic antigens, LID-1 fusion antigen, and the single fusion complex natural disaccharide-octyl (NDO)-LID show high sensitivity in multibacillary (MB) patients. However, serology is not applicable to paucibacillary patients, as they have weak humoral response and robust cell-mediated response, requiring tests for cellular biomarkers. Unlike ELISA-based tests, leprosy-specific POCT based on semi-synthetic PGL-I antigens and NDO-LID 1 antigen is easy to perform, cheaper, equipment-free, and can contribute to early diagnosis avoiding permanent incapacities and helping to interrupt M. leprae transmission. Besides its use to help diagnosis of household contacts or at-risk populations in endemic areas, potential applications of leprosy serology include monitoring MDT efficacy, identification of recent infection, especially in young children, as surrogate markers of disease progression to orient adult chemoprophylaxis and as a predictor of type 2 leprosy reactions. Advances in molecular biology techniques have reduced the complexity and execution time of qPCR confirming its utility to help diagnosis while leprosy-specific LAMP holds promise as an adjunct test to detect M. leprae DNA.

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.

Neuropathies of leprosy

Neuropathies form an integral part of the symptomatology of leprosy. Neuropathies of leprosy take various forms and shapes. At one end is the cutaneous nerve involvement adjacent to the anaesthetic skin patch and the other is of symmetrical pansensory neuropathy and the devastating sensory ataxia of leprous ganglionits. Lepra reactions add to the spectrum. Hosts immunological status largely decides the clinical manifestations seen in nerves and skin. A wide array of diagnostic techniques like ultrasonography, magnetic resonance neurography, serological markers, molecular tests, skin biopsy and in selected cases, the nerve biopsy with special stains and electron microscopy are obtainable to help the clinical diagnosis. The unsuspecting clinician, lack of community awareness and limited availability of diagnostic tests are important adverse factors in the total outcome. Multi drug therapy is efficacious and corticosteroids reduce the impact of nerve damage in leprosy. The efficacy, dose and duration of corticosteroid therapy are presently inexact and other immune suppressants like azathioprine are being evaluated. Chronic disabilities and residual deficits require attention of multiple specialties. In the coming time, focus on prevention could lead to favourable results. This review will discuss the classification systems, common and uncommon clinical features, diagnostic armamentarium and therapeutic and preventive aspects of neuropathies 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.

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.

Development and evaluation of a droplet digital PCR assay for the diagnosis of paucibacillary leprosy in skin biopsy specimens

BACKGROUND

The reduced amounts of Mycobacterium leprae (M. leprae) among paucibacillary (PB) patients reflect the need to further optimize methods for leprosy diagnosis. An increasing number of reports have shown that droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (ddPCR) is a promising tool for diagnosis of infectious disease among samples with low copy number. To date, no publications have investigated the utility of ddPCR in the detection of M. leprae. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a ddPCR assay for the diagnosis of PB leprosy.

METHODOLOGY

The two most sensitive DNA targets for detection of M. leprae were selected from electronic databases for assessment of sensitivity and specificity by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and ddPCR. Control patients (n = 59) suffering from other dermatological diseases were used to define the cut-off of the duplex ddPCR assay. For comparative evaluation, qPCR and ddPCR assays were performed in 44 PB patients and 68 multibacillary (MB) patients.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

M. leprae-specific repetitive element (RLEP) and groEL (encoding the 65 kDa molecular chaperone GroEL) were used to develop the ddPCR assay by systematically analyzing specificity and sensitivity. Based on the defined cut-off value, the ddPCR assay showed greater sensitivity in detecting M. leprae DNA in PB patients compared with qPCR (79.5% vs 36.4%), while both assays have a 100% sensitivity in MB patients.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

We developed and evaluated a duplex ddPCR assay for leprosy diagnosis in skin biopsy samples from leprosy patients. While still costly, ddPCR might be a promising diagnostic tool for detection of PB leprosy.

Accuracy of Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays (ELISAs) in Detecting Antibodies against Mycobacterium leprae in Leprosy Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

IgM against Mycobacterium leprae may be detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) based on phenolic glycolipid I (PGL-I) or natural disaccharide octyl bovine serum albumin (ND-O-BSA) as antigens, and the IgG response can be detected by an ELISA based on lipid droplet protein 1 (LID-1). The titers of antibodies against these antigens vary with operational classification. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of ELISAs involving PGL-I and ND-O-BSA with that involving LID-1. We included studies that analyze multibacillary and paucibacillary leprosy cases and evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ELISAs based on LID-1 and/or PGL-I or ND-O-BSA as antigens to measure antibody titers against M. leprae. Studies were found via PubMed, the Virtual Health Library Regional Portal, Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde, Índice Bibliográfico Espanhol de Ciências de Saúde, the Brazilian Society of Dermatology, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, Cochrane Library, Embase (the Elsevier database), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies served as a methodological validity tool. Quantitative data were extracted using the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy. Sensitivity, specificity, and a diagnostic odds ratio were calculated, and a hierarchical summary receiver-operating characteristic curve and forest plots were constructed. The protocol register code for this meta-analysis is PROSPERO 2017: CRD42017055983. Nineteen studies were included. ND-O-BSA showed better overall performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio when compared with PGL-I and LID-1. The multibacillary group showed better performance on these parameters (than the paucibacillary group did), at 94%, 99%, 129, 0.05, and 2293, respectively. LID-1 did not provide any advantage regarding the overall estimate of sensitivity in comparison with PGL-I or ND-O-BSA.

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.

The role of microRNA-21 in predicting brain metastases from non-small cell lung cancer

Objective

This study aimed at exploring the role of microRNA-21 (miR-21) in predicting brain metastases (BM) from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

A total of 132 NSCLC patients, including 68 patients with BM and 64 patients without BM, were included in the study. NSCLC cells were collected and assigned to the inhibitor (IN) group, the mock group, and the negative control (NC) group. The quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction assay was used to detect the miR-21 expression. Cell proliferation, migration, invasion, and apoptosis were detected by colony-forming assay, MTT assay, transwell assay, and flow cytometry, respectively. Angiogenesis was measured by endothelial cell tube formation assay.

Results

The miR-21 expression was higher in NSCLC patients with BM than in those without BM. The miR-21 expression in the IN group was lower than that in the NC and mock groups. Compared with the NC and mock groups, the values of optical density (OD) and the colony-forming number decreased in the IN group. Compared with the NC and mock groups, cell invasion and migration abilities significantly reduced in the IN group. The IN group had higher apoptosis rate than the NC and mock groups. The tube length was shorter and the number of junction points was less in the IN group in comparison to the NC and mock groups.

Conclusion

miR-21 might be a potential biomarker for the development of BM in NSCLC patients and could promote the proliferation, migration, invasion, and angiogenesis of NSCLC cells.