Predicting the impact of household contact and mass chemoprophylaxis on future new leprosy cases in South Tarawa, Kiribati: A modelling study

Effectiveness of population-wide screening and mass drug administration for leprosy control in Kiribati: the COMBINE protocol

INTRODUCTION

Progress towards leprosy elimination is threatened by increasing incidence in 'hot-spot' areas where more effective control strategies are urgently required. In these areas, active case finding and leprosy prevention limited to known contacts is insufficient for control. Population-wide active case-finding together with universal prevention through mass drug administration (MDA) has been shown to be effective in 'hot-spot' areas, but is logistically challenging and expensive. Combining leprosy screening and MDA with other population-wide screening activities such as for tuberculosis may increase programme efficiency. There has been limited evaluation of the feasibility and effectiveness of combined screening and MDA interventions. The COMBINE study aims to bridge this knowledge gap.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This implementation study will assess the feasibility and effectiveness of active leprosy case-finding and treatment, combined with MDA using either single-dose rifampicin or rifamycin-containing tuberculosis preventive or curative treatment, for reducing leprosy incidence in Kiribati. The leprosy programme will run over 2022-2025 in concert with population-wide tuberculosis screening-and-treatment in South Tarawa. The primary research question is to what extent the intervention reduces the annual leprosy new case detection rate (NCDR) in adults and children compared with routine screening and postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) among close contacts (baseline leprosy control activities). Comparisons will be made with (1) the preintervention NCDR separably among adults and children in South Tarawa (before-after study) and (2) the corresponding NCDRs in the rest of the country. Additionally, the postintervention prevalence of leprosy obtained from a survey of a 'hot-spot' sub-population will be compared with prevalence documented during the intervention. The intervention will be implemented in collaboration with the Kiribati National Leprosy Programme.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approval has been obtained from the Kiribati Ministry of Health and Medical Services (MHMS), the University of Otago (H22/111) and the University of Sydney (2021/127) Human Research Ethics Committees. Findings will be shared with the MHMS, local communities and internationally through publication.

Population-wide active case finding and prevention for tuberculosis and leprosy elimination in Kiribati: the PEARL study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Population-wide interventions offer a pathway to tuberculosis (TB) and leprosy elimination, but 'real-world' implementation in a high-burden setting using a combined approach has not been demonstrated. This implementation study aims to demonstrate the feasibility and evaluate the effect of population-wide screening, treatment and prevention on TB and leprosy incidence rates, as well as TB transmission.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A non-randomised 'screen-and-treat' intervention conducted in the Pacific atoll of South Tarawa, Kiribati. Households are enumerated and all residents ≥3 years, as well as children <3 years with recent household exposure to TB or leprosy, invited for screening. Participants are screened using tuberculin skin testing, signs and symptoms of TB or leprosy, digital chest X-ray with computer-aided detection and sputum testing (Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra). Those diagnosed with disease are referred to the National TB and Leprosy Programme for management. Participants with TB infection are offered TB preventive treatment and those without TB disease or infection, or leprosy, are offered leprosy prophylaxis. The primary study outcome is the difference in the annual TB case notification rate before and after the intervention; a similar outcome is included for leprosy. The effect on TB transmission will be measured by comparing the estimated annual risk of TB infection in primary school children before and after the intervention, as a co-primary outcome used for power calculations. Comparison of TB and leprosy case notification rates in South Tarawa (the intervention group) and the rest of Kiribati (the control group) before, during and after the intervention is a secondary outcome.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approval was obtained from the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee (project no. 2021/127) and the Kiribati Ministry of Health and Medical Services (MHMS). Findings will be shared with the MHMS and local communities, published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences.

Determining target populations for leprosy prophylactic interventions: a hotspot analysis in Indonesia

Background

Leprosy incidence remained at around 200,000 new cases globally for the last decade. Current strategies to reduce the number of new patients include early detection and providing post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to at-risk populations. Because leprosy is distributed unevenly, it is crucial to identify high-risk clusters of leprosy cases for targeting interventions. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) methodology can be used to optimize leprosy control activities by identifying clustering of leprosy cases and determining optimal target populations for PEP.

Methods

The geolocations of leprosy cases registered from 2014 to 2018 in Pasuruan and Pamekasan (Indonesia) were collected and tested for spatial autocorrelation with the Moran’s I statistic. We did a hotspot analysis using the Heatmap tool of QGIS to identify clusters of leprosy cases in both areas. Fifteen cluster settings were compared, varying the heatmap radius (i.e., 500 m, 1000 m, 1500 m, 2000 m, or 2500 m) and the density of clustering (low, moderate, and high). For each cluster setting, we calculated the number of cases in clusters, the size of the cluster (km²), and the total population targeted for PEP under various strategies.

Results

The distribution of cases was more focused in Pasuruan (Moran’s I = 0.44) than in Pamekasan (0.27). The proportion of total cases within identified clusters increased with heatmap radius and ranged from 3% to almost 100% in both areas. The proportion of the population in clusters targeted for PEP decreased with heatmap radius from > 100% to 5% in high and from 88 to 3% in moderate and low density clusters. We have developed an example of a practical guideline to determine optimal cluster settings based on a given PEP strategy, distribution of cases, resources available, and proportion of population targeted for PEP.

Conclusion

Policy and operational decisions related to leprosy control programs can be guided by a hotspot analysis which aid in identifying high-risk clusters and estimating the number of people targeted for prophylactic interventions.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07103-0.

The long-term impact of the Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) program on leprosy incidence: A modelling study

Background

The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) program explored the feasibility and impact of contact tracing and the provision of single dose rifampicin (SDR) to eligible contacts of newly diagnosed leprosy patients in Brazil, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. As the impact of the programme is difficult to establish in the short term, we apply mathematical modelling to predict its long-term impact on the leprosy incidence.

Methodology

The individual-based model SIMCOLEP was calibrated and validated to the historic leprosy incidence data in the study areas. For each area, we assessed two scenarios: 1) continuation of existing routine activities as in 2014; and 2) routine activities combined with LPEP starting in 2015. The number of contacts per index patient screened varied from 1 to 36 between areas. Projections were made until 2040.

Principal findings

In all areas, the LPEP program increased the number of detected cases in the first year(s) of the programme as compared to the routine programme, followed by a faster reduction afterwards with increasing benefit over time. LPEP could accelerate the reduction of the leprosy incidence by up to six years as compared to the routine programme. The impact of LPEP varied by area due to differences in the number of contacts per index patient included and differences in leprosy epidemiology and routine control programme.

Conclusions

The LPEP program contributes significantly to the reduction of the leprosy incidence and could potentially accelerate the interruption of transmission. It would be advisable to include contact tracing/screening and SDR in routine leprosy programmes.

The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) program explored the feasibility and impact of contact tracing and the provision of SDR to eligible contacts of newly diagnosed leprosy patients in states or districts of Brazil, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. This study investigated the long-term impact of the LPEP program on the leprosy new case detection rate (NCDR). Our results show that LPEP could reduce the NCDR beyond the impact of the routine leprosy control programme and that many new cases could be prevented. The benefit of LPEP increases gradually over time. LPEP could accelerate the time of reaching predicted NCDR levels of 2040 under routine program by up to six years. Furthermore, we highlighted how the impact varies between countries due to differences in the number of contacts per index patient screened and differences in leprosy epidemiology and national control programme. Generally, including both household contacts and neighbours (> 20 contacts per index patient) would yield the highest impact.

Leprosy incidence and risk estimates in a 33-year contact cohort of leprosy patients

Reduction in incidence has been associated with the introduction of novel approaches, like chemo/immune-prophylaxis. Incidence determined through follow-up cohort studies can evaluate the implementation of these innovative policies towards control and prevention. We have assessed the incidence in our contacts cohort over past 33 years, considering the effect of demographic and clinical variables. Survival analysis was used to estimate the risk of leprosy. A total of 9024 contacts were evaluated, of which 192 developed leprosy, resulting in an overall incidence of 1.4/1000 person-years. The multivariate analysis showed that the major risk factors were (i) contact from MB index cases and (ii) consanguinity (iii) intra household contact. Lower risk was detected for contacts with BCG scar who were revaccinated. There was a significant decrease in accumulated risk between the 2011-2019 period compared with 1987, probably linked to the improvement in laboratory tools to monitor contacts, thereby providing early diagnosis of contacts at intake and reduction of transmission. Our findings suggest that a combination of contact surveillance and tracing, adequate neurodermatological examination, and availability of molecular tools is highly effective in supporting early diagnosis, while a second dose of the BCG vaccination can exert extra protection.

The State of Affairs in Post-Exposure Leprosy Prevention: A Descriptive Meta-Analysis on Immuno- and Chemo-Prophylaxis

OBJECTIVE

Annually, over 200,000 people are diagnosed with leprosy, also called Hansen's disease. This number has been relatively stable over the past years. Progress has been made in the fields of chemoprophylaxis and immunoprophylaxis to prevent leprosy, with a primary focus on close contacts of patients. In this descriptive meta-analysis, we summarize the evidence and identify knowledge gaps regarding post-exposure prophylaxis against leprosy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology was conducted by searching the medical scientific databases Cochrane, Embase, Pubmed/MEDLINE, Research Gate, Scopus and Web of Science on Jan. 22, 2020, using a combination of synonyms for index terms in four languages: "leprosy" and "population" or "contacts" and "prevention" or "prophylaxis." Subsequently, Infolep.org and Google Scholar were searched and the "snowball method" was used to retrieve other potentially relevant literature. The found articles were screened for eligibility using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria.

RESULTS

After deduplication, 1,515 articles were screened, and 125 articles were included in this descriptive meta-analysis. Immunoprophylaxis by bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination is known to provide protection against leprosy. The protection it offers is higher in household contacts of leprosy patients compared with the general population and is seen to decline over time. Contact follow-up screening is important in the first period after BCG administration, as a substantial number of new leprosy patients presents three months post-vaccination. Evidence for the benefit of re-vaccination is conflicting. The World Health Organization (WHO) included BCG in its Guidelines for the Diagnosis, Treatment and Prevention of Leprosy by stating that BCG at birth should be maintained in at least all leprosy high-burden regions. Literature shows that several vaccination interventions with other immunoprophylactic agents demonstrate similar or slightly less efficacy in leprosy risk reduction compared with BCG. However, most of these studies do not exclusively focus on post-exposure prophylaxis. Two vaccines are considered future candidates for leprosy prophylaxis: Mycobacterium indicus pranii (MiP) and LepVax. For chemoprophylaxis, trials were performed with dapsone/acedapsone, rifampicin, and ROM, a combination of rifampicin, ofloxacin, and minocycline. Single-dose rifampicin is favored as post-exposure prophylaxis, abbreviated as SDR-PEP. It demonstrated a protective effect of 57% in the first two years after administration to contacts of leprosy patients. It is inexpensive, and adverse events are rare. The risk of SDR-PEP inducing rifampicin resistance is considered negligible, but continuous monitoring in accordance with WHO policies should be encouraged. The integration of contact screening and SDR-PEP administration into different leprosy control programs was found to be feasible and well accepted. Since 2018, SDR-PEP is included in the WHO Guidelines for the Diagnosis, Treatment and Prevention of Leprosy.

CONCLUSION

Progress has been made in the areas of chemoprophylaxis and immunoprophylaxis to prevent leprosy in contacts of patients. Investing in vaccine studies, like LepVax and MiP, and increasing harmonization between tuberculosis (TB) and leprosy research groups is important. SDR-PEP is promising as a chemoprophylactic agent, and further implementation should be promoted. More chemoprophylaxis research is needed on: enhanced medication regimens; interventions in varying (epidemiological) settings, including focal mass drug administration (fMDA); specific approaches per contact type; combinations with screening variations and field-friendly rapid tests, if available in the future; community and health staff education; ongoing antibiotic resistance surveillance; and administering chemoprophylaxis with SDR-PEP prior to BCG administration. Additionally, both leprosy prophylactic drug registration nationally and prophylactic drug availability globally at low or no cost are important for the implementation and further upscaling of preventive measures against leprosy, such as SDR-PEP and new vaccines.

Surveillance of Leprosy in Kiribati, 1935-2017

In Kiribati, unlike most countries, high and increasing numbers of cases of leprosy have been reported despite the availability of multidrug therapy and efforts to improve case finding and management. Historic records show that 28 cases had been identified by 1925. A systematic population survey in 1997 identified 135 new cases; the mean incidence rate for 1993–1997 was 7.4/10,000 population. After administering mass chemoprophylaxis, the country reached the elimination threshold (prevalence <1/10,000), but case numbers have rebounded. The mean annualized rate of new cases in 2013–2017 was 15/10,000 population, with the highest new case rates (>20/10,000 population) in the main population centers of South Tarawa and Betio. Spread is expected to continue in areas where crowding and poor socioeconomic conditions persist and may accelerate as sea levels rise from climate change. New initiatives to improve social conditions are needed, and efforts such as postexposure chemoprophylaxis should be implemented to prevent spread.