OBJECTIVES: Leprosy household contacts represent a group at high risk of developing the disease. The aim of this study was to detect Mycobacterium leprae subclinical infection in this group through serological and molecular parameters. METHODS: Serum anti-PGL1 IgG/IgM and salivary anti-PGL1 IgA/IgM was investigated using an ELISA, and nasal carriage of M. leprae DNA was detected by PCR, in leprosy household contacts of paucibacillary (PB) and multibacillary (MB) household leprosy patients (n=135), their index cases (n=30), and in persons living in a low endemic city (n=17). RESULTS: Salivary anti-PGL1 IgA and IgM and serum anti-PGL1 IgG showed good correlation comparing contacts and index cases (p<0.01, p<0.005, and p<0.0001, respectively). This was not observed for serum anti-PGL1 IgM (p>0.05). A high frequency of anti-PGL1 IgM positivity was found in IgG-negative samples (p<0.0001). For IgG-positive samples, IgM antibodies were also positive in most of the samples. None of the 17 volunteers living in a low endemic city presented seropositivity for IgG; however, two of them showed positivity for anti-PGL1 IgM. M. leprae DNA was found in the nasal swabs of nine out of the 85 MB household leprosy contacts (10.6%) and in three out of the 50 PB household leprosy contacts (6.0%). CONCLUSION: We strongly suggest that serum IgG/IgM and salivary anti-PGL1 IgA/IgM measurements are used to follow leprosy household contacts.
OBJECTIVES:Leprosy household contacts represent a group at high risk of developing the disease. The aim of this study was to detect Mycobacterium leprae subclinical infection in this group through serological and molecular parameters. METHODS: Serum anti-PGL1 IgG/IgM and salivary anti-PGL1 IgA/IgM was investigated using an ELISA, and nasal carriage of M. leprae DNA was detected by PCR, in leprosy household contacts of paucibacillary (PB) and multibacillary (MB) household leprosypatients (n=135), their index cases (n=30), and in persons living in a low endemic city (n=17). RESULTS: Salivary anti-PGL1 IgA and IgM and serum anti-PGL1 IgG showed good correlation comparing contacts and index cases (p<0.01, p<0.005, and p<0.0001, respectively). This was not observed for serum anti-PGL1 IgM (p>0.05). A high frequency of anti-PGL1 IgM positivity was found in IgG-negative samples (p<0.0001). For IgG-positive samples, IgM antibodies were also positive in most of the samples. None of the 17 volunteers living in a low endemic city presented seropositivity for IgG; however, two of them showed positivity for anti-PGL1 IgM. M. leprae DNA was found in the nasal swabs of nine out of the 85 MB household leprosy contacts (10.6%) and in three out of the 50 PB household leprosy contacts (6.0%). CONCLUSION: We strongly suggest that serum IgG/IgM and salivary anti-PGL1 IgA/IgM measurements are used to follow leprosy household contacts.
Authors: Alexandre C de Macedo; Juliana A Guimarães; Raphael O Rodrigues; Thiago D V Araújo; Clodis M Tavares; Paula B Cabral; Maria Isabel de Moraes-Pinto; Aparecida T Nagao-Dias Journal: J Clin Lab Anal Date: 2017-06-08 Impact factor: 2.352
Authors: Shahla Kakoei; Bahareh Hosseini; Ali-Akbar Haghdoost; Mojgan Sanjari; Ahmad Gholamhosseinian; Vahid F N Afshar Journal: Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J Date: 2015-11-23
Authors: Filipe Rocha Lima; Fred Bernardes Filho; Vanderson Mayron Granemann Antunes; Jaci Maria Santana; Regina Coeli Palma de Almeida; Diana Mota Toro; Vinicius Fozatti Bragagnollo; Gabriel Martins da Costa Manso; Natália Aparecida de Paula; Eliracema Silva Alves; Lee W Riley; Sérgio Arruda; Marco Andrey Cipriani Frade Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-06-09
Authors: Anouk van Hooij; Elisa M Tjon Kon Fat; Susan J F van den Eeden; Louis Wilson; Moises Batista da Silva; Claudio G Salgado; John S Spencer; Paul L A M Corstjens; Annemieke Geluk Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-08-21 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Maria Tió-Coma; Charlotte Avanzi; Els M Verhard; Louise Pierneef; Anouk van Hooij; Andrej Benjak; Johan Chandra Roy; Marufa Khatun; Khorshed Alam; Paul Corstjens; Stewart T Cole; Jan Hendrik Richardus; Annemieke Geluk Journal: Front Microbiol Date: 2020-06-16 Impact factor: 5.640
Authors: Anouk van Hooij; Susan van den Eeden; Renate Richardus; Elisa Tjon Kon Fat; Louis Wilson; Kees L M C Franken; Roel Faber; Merufa Khatun; Khorshed Alam; Abu Sufian Chowdhury; Jan Hendrik Richardus; Paul Corstjens; Annemieke Geluk Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2019-08-14 Impact factor: 8.143
Authors: André Alan Nahas; Mayara Ingrid de Sousa Lima; Isabela Maria Bernardes Goulart; Luiz Ricardo Goulart Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2018-05-30 Impact factor: 7.561