Leprosy is a chronic human disease caused by the yet-uncultured pathogen Mycobacterium leprae. Although readily curable with multidrug therapy (MDT), over 200,000 new cases are still reported annually. Here, we obtain M. leprae genome sequences from DNA extracted directly from patients’ skin biopsies using a customized protocol. Comparative and phylogenetic analysis of 154 genomes from 25 countries provides insight into evolution and antimicrobial resistance, uncovering lineages and phylogeographic trends, with the most ancestral strains linked to the Far East. In addition to known MDT-resistance mutations, we detect other mutations associated with antibiotic resistance, and retrace a potential stepwise emergence of extensive drug resistance in the pre-MDT era. Some of the previously undescribed mutations occur in genes that are apparently subject to positive selection, and two of these (ribD, fadD9) are restricted to drug-resistant strains. Finally, nonsense mutations in the nth excision repair gene are associated with greater sequence diversity and drug resistance.
BackgroundLeprosy reactions are a significant cause of morbidity in leprosy population. Erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL) is an immunological complication affecting approximately 50% of patients with lepromatous leprosy (LL) and 10% of borderline lepromatous (BL) leprosy. ENL is associated with clinical features such as skin lesions, neuritis, arthritis, dactylitis, eye inflammation, osteitis, orchitis, lymphadenitis and nephritis. ENL is treated mainly with corticosteroids and corticosteroids are often required for extended periods of time which may lead to serious adverse effects. High mortality rate and increased morbidity associated with corticosteroid treatment of ENL has been reported. For improved and evidence-based treatment of ENL, documenting the systems affected by ENL is important. We report here the clinical features of ENL in a cohort of patients with acute ENL who were recruited for a clinico-pathological study before and after prednisolone treatment.Materials and methodsA case–control study was performed at ALERT hospital, Ethiopia. Forty-six LL patients with ENL and 31 non-reactional LL matched controls were enrolled to the study and followed for 28 weeks. Clinical features were systematically documented at three visits (before, during and after predinsolone treatment of ENL cases) using a specifically designed form. Skin biopsy samples were obtained from each patient before and after treatment and used for histopathological investigations to supplement the clinical data.ResultsPain was the most common symptom reported (98%) by patients with ENL. Eighty percent of them had reported skin pain and more than 70% had nerve and joint pain at enrolment. About 40% of the patients developed chronic ENL. Most individuals 95.7% had nodular skin lesions. Over half of patients with ENL had old nerve function impairment (NFI) while 13% had new NFI at enrolment. Facial and limb oedema were present in 60% patients. Regarding pathological findings before treatment, dermal neutrophilic infiltration was noted in 58.8% of patients with ENL compared to 14.3% in LL controls. Only 14.7% patients with ENL had evidence of vasculitis at enrolment.ConclusionIn our study, painful nodular skin lesions were present in all ENL patients. Only 58% patients had dermal polymorphonuclear cell infiltration showing that not all clinically confirmed ENL cases have neutrophilic infiltration in lesions. Very few patients had histological evidence of vasculitis. Many patients developed chronic ENL and these patients require inpatient corticosteroid treatment for extended periods which challenges the health service facility in resource poor settings, as well as the patient’s quality of life.
Background Tuberculosis lymphadenitis (TBLN) is a growing public health concern in Ethiopia. However, there is limited information available on gene mutations conferring drug resistance and genetic diversity of M. tuberculosis isolates from TBLN patients. Methods Drug resistance and genetic diversity analysis were done on 91 M. tuberculosis isolates from culture positive TBLN patients collected between 2016 and 2017. Detection of mutations conferring resistance was carried out using GenoType MTBDRplus VER 2.0. Thereafter, isolates were typed using spoligotyping. Results Out of the 91 strains, mutations conferring resistance to rifampicin (RIF) and isoniazid (INH) were observed in two (2.2%) and six (6.6%) isolates, respectively. The two RIF resistant isolates displayed a mutation at codon 531 in the rpoB gene with amino acid change of S531L. Among the six INH resistant strains, four isolates had shown mutation at the KatG gene at codon 315 with amino acid change of S315T, one isolate had a mutation at the inhA gene at codon 15 with amino acid change of C15T and one isolate had a mutation at the inhA gene with unknown amino acid change. All drug resistant isolates were from treatment naive TBLN patients. The dominantly identified Spoligo International Types (SITs) were SIT25, SIT149, and SIT53, respectively; these accounted for 43% of the total number of strains. The isolates were grouped into four main lineages; Lineage 1 (2, 2.2%), Lineage 3 (38, 41.7%), Lineage 4 (49, 53.8%) and Lineage 7 (2, 2.2%). Four out of six (66.7%) isolates with drug resistance conferring mutations belonged to clustered strains (strains with shared SIT). Conclusion The detection of drug resistant conferring mutation in treatment naïve TBLN patients together with detection of drug resistant isolates among clustered strains might suggest resistant strains' transmission in the community. This needs to be carefully considered to prevent the spread of drug resistant clones in the country.
BackgroundDiagnosis of leprosy mainly relies on clinical examination due to the inconsistent sensitivity and poor reproducibility of the current laboratory tests. Utilisation of alternative methods to the standard Ziehl Neelsen (ZN), Fite-Faraco (FF) and Haematoxylin and Eosin (H&E) staining procedures may eventually improve leprosy diagnosis.Methodology/Principal findingsIn this comparative study, the performance of the fluorescent Auramine O (AO) staining and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was assessed with different skin samples using a combination of ZN, FF and H&E staining as the gold standard. AO, ZN, FF, H&E and PCR tests were performed on slit skin smears (SSS) and/or punch biopsies collected from 141 clinically confirmed leprosy cases and 28 non-leprosy skin samples. DNA was extracted from punch biopsies using two different methods with or without mechanical lysis.Sensitivities were 87.6%, 59.3% and 77% for H&E, ZN and FF, respectively, whereas it reached 65.5% and 77.9% for AO in SSS and tissue sections and 91.1% for PCR in tissue samples. Morover, samples with low bacillary index, sensitivity of AO staining (61.8%) was similar to FF (60%, p>0.05) and lower than PCR (86.6%, p<0.05). Sensitivity of PCR also increased (96.8%, p<0.05) when mechanical lysis was used during DNA extraction compared to enzymatic treatment alone (84.6%).Conclusions/SignificanceOur results showed that for diagnostic purposes, analysis of skin section is more sensitive than SSS, especially for samples with low bacillary load. AO staining on SSS and tissue sections was not significantly better than other routine diagnostic tests but considerably more user friendly. The sensitivity of PCR was higher than current standard methods and increased when combined with more efficient DNA extraction using mechanical and chemical lysis. Therefore, we recommend AO staining for the diagnosis of leprosy in lower health facilities such as health centres and district hospitals and PCR diagnosis at referral level and research centres.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.