IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0251631.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Latent leprosy infection identified by dual RLEP and anti-PGL-I positivity: Implications for new control strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Moises Batista da Silva
  • Wei Li
  • Raquel Carvalho Bouth
  • Angélica Rita Gobbo
  • Ana Caroline Cunha Messias
  • Tania Mara Pires Moraes
  • Erika Vanessa Oliveira Jorge
  • Josafá Gonçalves Barreto
  • Fred Bernardes Filho
  • Guilherme Augusto Barros Conde
  • Marco Andrey Cipriani Frade
  • Claudio Guedes Salgado
  • John Stewart Spencer

Abstract

The number of new cases of leprosy reported worldwide has remained essentially unchanged for the last decade despite continued global use of free multidrug therapy (MDT) provided to any diagnosed leprosy patient. In order to more effectively interrupt the chain of transmission, new strategies will be required to detect those with latent disease who contribute to furthering transmission. To improve the ability to diagnose leprosy earlier in asymptomatic infected individuals, we examined the combined use of two well-known biomarkers of M. leprae infection, namely the presence of M. leprae DNA by PCR from earlobe slit skin smears (SSS) and positive antibody titers to the M. leprae-specific antigen, Phenolic Glycolipid I (anti-PGL-I) from leprosy patients and household contacts living in seven hyperendemic cities in the northern state of Pará, Brazilian Amazon. Combining both tests increased sensitivity, specificity and accuracy over either test alone. A total of 466 individuals were evaluated, including 87 newly diagnosed leprosy patients, 52 post-treated patients, 296 household contacts and 31 healthy endemic controls. The highest frequency of double positives (PGL-I+/RLEP+) were detected in the new case group (40/87, 46%) with lower numbers for treated (12/52, 23.1%), household contacts (46/296, 15.5%) and healthy endemic controls (0/31, 0%). The frequencies in these groups were reversed for double negatives (PGL-I-/RLEP-) for new cases (6/87, 6.9%), treated leprosy cases (15/52, 28.8%) and the highest in household contacts (108/296, 36.5%) and healthy endemic controls (24/31, 77.4%). The data strongly suggest that household contacts that are double positive have latent disease, are likely contributing to shedding and transmission of disease to their close contacts and are at the highest risk of progressing to clinical disease. Proposed strategies to reduce leprosy transmission in highly endemic areas may include chemoprophylactic treatment of this group of individuals to stop the spread of bacilli to eventually lower new case detection rates in these areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Moises Batista da Silva & Wei Li & Raquel Carvalho Bouth & Angélica Rita Gobbo & Ana Caroline Cunha Messias & Tania Mara Pires Moraes & Erika Vanessa Oliveira Jorge & Josafá Gonçalves Barreto & Fred B, 2021. "Latent leprosy infection identified by dual RLEP and anti-PGL-I positivity: Implications for new control strategies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-15, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0251631
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251631
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0251631
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0251631&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0251631?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0251631. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.