Background Protective effects of Bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) vaccination and clofazimine and dapsone treatment against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection have been reported. Patients at risk for leprosy represent an interesting model for assessing the effects of these therapies on the occurrence and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We assessed the influence of leprosy-related variables in the occurrence and severity of COVID-19. Methodology/Principal findings We performed a 14-month prospective real-world cohort study in which the main risk factor was 2 previous vaccinations with BCG and the main outcome was COVID-19 detection by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). A Cox proportional hazards model was used. Among the 406 included patients, 113 were diagnosed with leprosy. During follow-up, 69 (16.99%) patients contracted COVID-19. Survival analysis showed that leprosy was associated with COVID-19 (p<0.001), but multivariate analysis showed that only COVID-19-positive household contacts (hazard ratio (HR) = 8.04; 95% CI = 4.93–13.11) and diabetes mellitus (HR = 2.06; 95% CI = 1.04–4.06) were significant risk factors for COVID-19. Conclusions/Significance Leprosy patients are vulnerable to COVID-19 because they have more frequent contact with SARS-CoV-2-infected patients, possibly due to social and economic limitations. Our model showed that the use of corticosteroids, thalidomide, pentoxifylline, clofazimine, or dapsone or BCG vaccination did not affect the occurrence or severity of COVID-19.

Background The implications of COVID‐19 co‐infection in patients under treatment for Hansen's disease (HD, leprosy) remain uncertain. We aimed to describe clinical characteristics, treatments, and outcomes in patients with HD and COVID‐19 in Brazil. Methods Cross‐sectional study recruiting adult HD patients with PCR‐confirmed COVID‐19 from five HD treatment centers in Brazil between March 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. At the time of this study, no patient had received COVID‐19 vaccine. Results Of 1377 patients under treatment for HD, 70 (5.1%) were diagnosed with COVID‐19. Of these, 41 (58.6%) had PCR‐confirmed COVID‐19, comprising 19 men and 22 women, aged 24–67 (median 45) years. HD was multibacillary in 39/41 patients. Eight patients ceased WHO Multi‐Drug Therapy for HD, three for lack of drugs, two because of COVID‐19, and three for other reasons. Of the 33 who continued treatment, 26 were on the standard regimen and seven an alternative regimen. Seventeen patients were receiving oral prednisone, including nine patients with type 1 reaction, four with type 2 reaction, three with neuritis, and one with rheumatologic disease. Twelve patients were hospitalized for COVID‐19, and six patients died, of whom three had hypertension and one also had type 2 diabetes and obesity. Conclusions COVID‐19 and Hansen's disease co‐infection did not appear to change the clinical picture of either disease in this cross‐sectional study. The wider impact of the pandemic on persons affected by HD requires follow‐up and monitoring.

Introdução: Cidades litorâneas possuem atividades econômicas como a pesca e o turismo que promovem o contato com a água do mar e, consequentemente, a exposição a microrganismos raramente encontrados em outros contextos e muitas vezes de diagnóstico tardio, podendo resultar em morbidade ou morte significativa. Objetivo: Essa revisão da literatura objetiva mostrar a importância da suspeição da infecção marinha na Atenção Primária, sua etiologia, manifestações clínicas, tratamento, complicações e prevenção. Métodos: Foi realizada pesquisa em bases de dados eletrônicos (SciELO, Google Acadêmico, MEDLINE e PubMed). Resultados: Foram encontrados 135 artigos e vinte foram selecionados, referentes aos anos de 2003 a 2018. Observou-se escassez de estudos que avaliam a efetividade de esquemas de antibioticoterapia e sua duração necessária. Além disso, verificou-se a ausência de classificação no Código Internacional de Doenças (CID-10) e Descritores em Ciências da Saúde (DeCS), fato que prejudica a notificação e estudos epidemiológicos sobre o assunto. Conclusão: É preciso incluir a infecção marinha no diagnóstico diferencial de casos de ferimentos crônicos de difícil diagnóstico, principalmente se houver histórico de exposição a ambiente marinho. Novos estudos se fazem necessários para avaliação da terapêutica adequada. Outrossim, é fundamental conscientizar a população quanto ao risco de infecção marinha e seus métodos de prevenção.