BackgroundThe objective of this study was to investigate the association between KIR genes and the immunopathogenesis of leprosy.MethodsThe types of KIR and HLA genes were evaluated by PCR-SSOP-Luminex in 408 patients with leprosy and 413 healthy individuals. Statistical analysis was performed using the Chi-square or Fisher’s exact test and stepwise multivariate analysis.ResultsThere was a higher frequency of activating KIR genes (KIR2DS1, 2DS2 and 3DS1) together with their HLA ligands in the tuberculoid (TT) group as compared to the lepromatous leprosy (LL) group. KIR2DL2/2DL2-C1 was more frequent in the patient, TT and LL groups than in the control group. Borderline patients presented a higher frequency of inhibitory pairs when compared to the control group, and a higher frequency of activating pairs as compared to the LL group. Multivariate analysis confirmed the associations and demonstrated that being a female is a protective factor against the development of the disease per se and the more severe clinical form.ConclusionsThis study showed that activating and inhibitory KIR genes may influence the development of leprosy – in particular, activating genes may protect against the more aggressive form of the disease – thereby demonstrating the role of NK cells in the immunopathology of the disease.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2334-14-438) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
BackgroundEvidence suggests that human leukocyte antigen (HLA) alleles influence the host immune response against Mycobacterium leprae. However, the association between HLA alleles and borderline (B) leprosy has not been studied. The aim of this study was to determine whether HLA class I and II molecules are associated with susceptibility or resistance to B leprosy including borderline-tuberculoid (BT), borderline-borderline (BB), and borderline-lepromatous (BL).MethodsDNA was obtained by the salting-out technique from the blood samples of 202 patients with B leprosy and 478 control subjects. HLA class I (A*, B*, and C* loci) and class II (DRB1* and DQB1* loci) genotypes were determined by polymerase chain reaction amplification and reverse hybridization with sequence-specific oligonucleotide probes and sequence-specific primers.ResultsThe case-controlled analysis results showed a significant association between B leprosy and HLA-C*05 (5.94% vs. 14.02%; p = 0.002, OR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.20–0.73, pc = 0.032) and HLA-DRB1*07 (16.34% vs. 26.77%; p = 0.003, OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.3–0.8, pc = 0.039). A protective association was observed between BL leprosy and HLA-DQB1*02 (18.18% vs. 39.53%; p = 0.005, OR = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.15–0.75, pc = 0.025). In reactional patients, a significant association was observed between HLA-B*15 (28.72% vs. 12.76%; p = 0.011, OR = 2.75, 95% CI = 1.30–5.85, pc = 0.352) and predisposition to reversal reaction. Haplotype analysis showed that A*02-B*07-C*07-DRB1*15-DQB1*06 (2.97% vs. 1.04%; p = 0.015) and A*02-B*40-C*03-DRB1*13-DQB1*06 (1.73% vs. 0.10%; p = 0.0011) were associated with susceptibility to the B form. The presence of the HLA-DRB1*02 or HLA-DRB1*03/HLA-DQB1*01 haplotypes in B patients (22.05% vs. 33.0%; p = 0.005) suggested the involvement of these haplotypes in this clinical form of the disease.ConclusionsThe results indicate the involvement of HLA class I and class II molecules in B leprosy and reversal reactions; it also suggest a role for HLA in polarization of the disease in this group of patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12879-015-0751-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.