BACKGROUNDLeprosy is a chronic infectious disease caused by the obligate intracellular bacillus Mycobacterium leprae. Because leprosy diagnosis is complex and requires professional expertise, new tools and methodologies are needed to detect cases in early stages and prevent transmission. The M. leprae genome contains mce1A, which encodes a putative mammalian cell entry protein (Mce1A). We hypothesised that the presence of Mce1A on the cell surface could be detected by the host's immune system.OBJECTIVEThe aim of this study was to evaluate antibody responses against the Mce1A protein in leprosy patients, household contacts of patients, and the general population to present an addition tool for leprosy diagnosis.METHODSA cross-sectional study involving 89 volunteers [55 leprosy cases, 12 household contacts (HHC) and 22 endemic controls (EC)] was conducted at Couto Maia Hospital, in Salvador, Bahia (BA), Brazil.RESULTSThe median anti-Mce1A IgA was significantly higher in multibacillary (MB) and paucibacillary (PB) cases than in EC (p < 0.0001). A similar trend was observed in IgM levels, which were significantly higher in both MB (p < 0.0001) and PB (p = 0.0006) groups compared to in EC individuals. The greatest differences were observed for IgG class-specific antibodies against Mce1A. The median levels of MB and PB were significantly higher compared to both controls HHC and EC (MB or PB vs EC, MB vs HHC p < 0.0001; PB vs HHC, p = 0.0013). Among leprosy cases, IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay sensitivity and specificity were 92.7% and 97.1%, respectively. IgG positivity was confirmed in 92.1% and 94.1% of MB and PB patients, respectively.CONCLUSIONThis novel diagnostic approach presents an easy, non-invasive, and inexpensive method for leprosy screening, which may be applicable in endemic areas.
Hansen’s disease (HD) is an ancient disease, but more than 200,000 new cases were reported worldwide in 2019. Currently, there are not many satisfactory immunoassay methods for its diagnosis. We evaluated antibodies against Mce1A as a promising new serological biomarker. We collected plasma from new cases, contacts, and endemic controls in the city of Parnaíba and treated patients at Carpina, a former HD colony in Piauí state, northeastern Brazil. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess the assay thresholds, specificity and sensitivity of the IgA, IgM, and IgG antibodies against α-Mce1A by indirect ELISA and compared it with IgM anti-PGL-I and molecular diagnosis by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). Venn diagrams were generated to represent the overlap in the antibody positivity pattern. Multivariate analysis was performed to assess the potential predictor of antibodies for the outcome of having an HD diagnosis. IgA and IgG were positive in 92.3 and 84% of patients, respectively. IgM was negative for all treated patients. IgG had a sensitivity and specificity of 94.7 and 100%, respectively. IgM-positive individuals had a 3.6 chance of being diagnosed with HD [OR = 3.6 (95% CI = 1.1–11.6);p= 0.028], while IgA-positive individuals had a 2.3 chance [OR = 2.3 (95% CI = 1.2–4.3);p= 0.005] compared to endemic controls. We found that the Mce1A antibody profile can be an excellent diagnostic method of HD. IgA is an ideal biomarker for confirming contact with the bacillus. IgM has potential in the detection of active disease. IgG antibodies confirm the performance of these serological markers in diagnosis and therapeutic follow-up.
The bacilloscopy of the slit-skin smear (SSS) is the exclusive laboratory test associated with dermato-neurological evaluation for Hansen’s disease (HD) diagnosis; however, it is negative in the majority of PB or primary neural forms. Thus, a PCR technique involving different sequences and target genes has been performed with an aim to increase the sensitivity and specificity of M. leprae identification, especially in patients with low bacillary loads. Additionally, serological assays based on antibody response reflect infection levels and indicate that this could be a simpler, less invasive technique for estimating M. leprae exposure. Serological tests and PCR have been shown to be more sensitive and accurate than the SSS. Our study aimed to measure accuracy and performance among the SSS and PCR of dermal scrapings stored on filter paper and APGL-I serology for diagnosis in HD. A cross-sectional study analyzing the medical records (n = 345) of an HD outpatient-dermatology clinic from 2014 to 2021 was conducted. Accuracy performance parameters, correlation, and concordance were used to assess the value among the SSS, PCR, and APGL-I exams in HD. The SSS presented 24.5% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 37.4% accuracy, and the lowest negative predictive value (21.5%). The PCR assay had 41, 100, and 51% sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, respectively. PCR and APGL-I serology increased the detection of HD cases by 16 and 20.6%, respectively. PCR was positive in 51.3% of patients when the SSS was negative. The SSS obtained moderate concordance with PCR [k-value: 0.43 (CI: 0.33–0.55)] and APGL-I [k-value: 0.41 (CI: 0.31–0.53)]. A moderate positive correlation was found between the APGL-I index and the bacillary index (r = 0.53; P < 0.0001). Thus, the use of the SSS is a low sensitivity and accuracy method due to its low performance in HD detection. The use of PCR and serological tests allows for a more sensitive and accurate diagnosis of patients.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.