| Literature DB >> 22720098 |
Cristian Valencia1, Jorge Arévalo, Jean Claude Dujardin, Alejandro Llanos-Cuentas, François Chappuis, Mirko Zimic.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increased rates for failure in leishmaniasis antimony treatment have been recently recognized worldwide. Although several risk factors have been identified there is no clinical score to predict antimony therapy failure of cutaneous leishmaniasis.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22720098 PMCID: PMC3373623 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001656
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Epidemiologial, clinical and laboratory characteristics of patients with ulcerative cutaneous leishmaniasis stratified by cure or failure condition with pentavalent antimonial treatment in Peru.
| Variable | Cure | Failed | P-value |
| Gender | 0.318 | ||
| Male | 22 (73.3%) | 8 (23.67%) | |
| Female | 47 (82.46%) | 10 (17.54%) | |
| Age (mean+−SD) | 32.36+−19.72 | 16.17+−12.81 | 0.001 |
| Activity | 0.001 | ||
| Low risk | 30 (65.22%) | 16 (34.78%) | |
| High risk | 38 (95%) | 2 (5%) | |
| Geographic location | 0.90 | ||
| Central and northern coast | 27 (81.82%) | 6 (18.18%) | |
| High amazone | 31 (79.49%) | 8 (20.51%) | |
| Southern Andes | 2 (66.67%) | 1 (33.3%) | |
| Low Amazone | 9 (75%) | 3 (25%) | |
| Duration of disease* (days) | 77.5 (45–114) | 60 (31–86) | 0.068 |
| Total area of lesion(s)* (cm2) | 2.71 (1.32–3.93) | 1.27 (0.34–2.07) | 0.007 |
| Total number lesions* | 1 (1–2) | 2 (1–2) | 0.95 |
| Skin test diameter (mm) Mean+−SD | 9.12+−2.92 | 7.41+−1.37 | 0.053 |
| Concomitant-distant lesions | 0.015 | ||
| No | 64 (83.12%) | 13 (16.88%) | |
| Yes | 5 (50%) | 5 (50%) | |
| Genotype | 0.123 | ||
|
| 22 (91.67%) | 2 (8.33%) | |
|
| 17 (68%) | 8 (32%) | |
|
| 30 (78.95%) | 8 (21.05%) |
Mean and standard deviation (SD) or frequencies were compared between cured and failed cases to antimony chemotherapy patients when normally distributed covariates were involved.
Median and (25th–75th) percentiles (inter-quartile range) were compared in variables with non normal distribution.
Logistic regression models to predict antimony treatment failure of ulcerative cutaneous leishmaniasis.
| Factor | Univariate analysis | P-value | Multiple-variable analysis 1 | P-value | Multiple-variable analysis 2 | P-value |
| Age | 0.94 (0.89–0.97) | 0.003 | 0.88 (0.81–0.97) | 0.010 | 0.92 (0.88–0.98) | 0.008 |
| Duration of disease | 0.99 (0.97–1.00) | 0.138 | 0.97 (0.95–0.99) | 0.025 | 0.97(0.94–0.99) | 0.02 |
| high-risk/low risk Activity | 0.098 (0.02–0.46) | 0.003 | 0.07 (0.009–0.54) | 0.011 | 0.12(0.02–0.75) | 0.02 |
| Number of lesion(s) | 0.93 (0.32–2.7) | 0.896 | ||||
| Total area of lesion(s) | 0.499 (0.31–0.82) | 0.006 | 0.53 (0.27–1.04) | 0.065 | ||
| Concomitant-distant lesion(s) | ||||||
| No | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||
| Yes | 4.92 (1.24–19.48) | 0.023 | 30.5 (1.67–558.56) | 0.021 | 6.27(0.96–40.7) | 0.054 |
| Leishmania species | ||||||
|
| 1 | 1 | ||||
|
| 5.17 (0.97–27.60) | 0.054 | 25.7 (2.34–282.30) | 0.008 | ||
|
| 2.93 (0.56–15.19) | 0.200 | 1 |
Odds ratio and its 95% confidence interval of the simple logistic regression in the univariate analysis.
Odds ratio and its 95% confidence interval of the multiple logistic regression for the Prognostic Score 1. R2 = 0.54; 85 patients in the model.
Odds ratio and its 95% confidence interval of the multiple logistic regression for the Prognostic Score 2 (without inclusion of the Leishmania species). R2 = 0.38; 85 patients in the model.
*: This variable was log-transformed before the analysis.
**: Odds ratio obtained after pooling L. guyanensis and L. peruviana and comparing against L. brasiliensis.
Figure 1Receiver Operating Curve for the Prognostic Score 1 (PS1) and Prognostic Score 2 (PS2) of antimony chemotherapy treatment failure.
Sensitivity and specificity to predict antimony treatment failure for the different cutoffs of the linear scores for the Prognostic Scores 1 and 2.
| Prognostic Score 1 | Prognostic Score 2 | |||
| Probability cutoff | Sensitivity | Specificity | Sensitivity | Specificity |
| 0.6 | 55.56 | 98.51 | 44.44 | 98.51 |
| 0.5 | 72.22 | 95.52 | 61.11 | 95.52 |
| 0.4 | 77.78 | 95.52 | 66.67 | 92.54 |
| 0.37 | 77.78 | 94.03 | 66.67 | 89.55 |
| 0.35 | 77.78 | 94.03 | 66.67 | 85.07 |
| 0.3 | 77.78 | 91.04 | 66.67 | 83.58 |
| 0.29 | 77.78 | 91.04 | 66.67 | 82.09 |
| 0.27 | 83.33 | 88.06 | 66.67 | 77.61 |
| 0.25 | 83.33 | 86.57 | 77.78 | 76.12 |
| 0.23 | 83.33 | 85.07 | 77.78 | 76.12 |
| 0.2 | 83.33 | 76.12 | 77.78 | 74.63 |
Prognostic Score 1. Linear score model based on the multiple logistic regression that included the six significant covariates described in Table 2.
Prognostic Score 2. Linear score model based on the multiple logistic regression that included the four significant covariates described in Table 2.
Regression coefficients of the logistic models for chemotherapy failure.
| Variable | Prognostic Score 1 | P-value | Prognostic Score 2 | P-value |
| Age | −0.12 | 0.01 | −.073 | 0.07 |
| Duration of disease | −0.03 | 0.02 | −0.03 | 0.02 |
| Total area of lesión(s) | −0.64 | 0.06 | ||
| Concomitant-distant lesion(s) | 3.41 | 0.02 | 1.83 | 0.05 |
| Low/high risk activity | −2.65 | 0.01 | −2.06 | 0.02 |
|
| 3.25 | 0.01 | ||
| Constant term | 6.62 | <0.01 | 2.84 | 0.02 |