Cargando…

Evaluation of antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China. METHODS: Eighty-three leprosy patients and 161 non-leprosy controls were enrolled from Hani-yi Autonomous Prefecture of Honghe, Yunnan Province, China. Leprosy patients were divided into m...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Xiaohua, You, Yuan-Gang, Yuan, You-Hua, Yuan, Lian Chao, Zhang, Ying, Yan, Wen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6152862/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30248098
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0006777
_version_ 1783357440438304768
author Chen, Xiaohua
You, Yuan-Gang
Yuan, You-Hua
Yuan, Lian Chao
Zhang, Ying
Yan, Wen
author_facet Chen, Xiaohua
You, Yuan-Gang
Yuan, You-Hua
Yuan, Lian Chao
Zhang, Ying
Yan, Wen
author_sort Chen, Xiaohua
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To evaluate antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China. METHODS: Eighty-three leprosy patients and 161 non-leprosy controls were enrolled from Hani-yi Autonomous Prefecture of Honghe, Yunnan Province, China. Leprosy patients were divided into multibacillary (MB, n = 38), paucibacillary (PB, n = 23), and post-multi-drug therapy (MDT, n = 22) groups. Controls were divided into the following groups: healthy household contacts (HHC, n = 119), tuberculosis (TB, n = 11), and endemic controls (EC, n = 31). The NDO-LID Rapid Test, M. leprae antigen-specific ELISA and antigen-specific IFN-γ secretion in a whole blood assay (WBA) were used to evaluate these subjects. RESULTS: The NDO-LID Rapid Test achieved higher positive response rates in MB than in PB patients[94.7%(36/38) vs 65.2%(15/23)], and these rates were higher than those observed by ELISA using anti-LID-1[92.1%(35/38) vs 52.2%(12/23)], anti-NDO-LID[92.1%(35/38) vs 47.8% (11/23)], and anti-ND-O-BSA[89.5%(34/38) vs 60.9%(14/23)]. However, the NDO-LID Rapid Test also showed a higher positive response rate in the EC group (33.3%,10/31), which was higher than the rates observed for anti-NDO-LID (12.9%,4/31) and anti-ND-O-BSA (16.1%,5/31). M. leprae antigen-specific ELISA demonstrated relatively high specificity (86.84–97.37%) but low sensitivity (15.97–72.73%) in discriminating between leprosy patients and non-leprosy controls by ROC curve analysis. In contrast, M. leprae antigen-specific IFN-γ secretion detection achieved higher positive response rates in PB than in MB patients (positive ratio of MB vs PB: 40% vs 56% for LID-1, 28.6% vs 47.8% for ML89, 31.4% vs 60.7% for ML2044, and 31.4 vs 47.8% for ML2028) and could distinguish MB from EC when stimulated with ML89(AUC = 0.6664) and PB fromTB when stimulated with ML2044 and ML2028(AUC = 0.7549 and 0.7372, respectively). CONCLUSION: The NDO-LID Rapid Test and M. leprae antigen-specific ELISA are useful tools to assist in the diagnosis of leprosy patients, especially MB patients, although the former had higher sensitivity but lower specificity than the latter. M. leprae antigen-specific IFN-γ release assessed by WBA has diagnostic value for distinguishing PB from TB but not for distinguishing PB from HHC or EC. Screening novel M. leprae-specific antigens, combining different M. leprae antigens and a multi-cytokine analyte model may be needed for more effective diagnosis of leprosy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6152862
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61528622018-10-19 Evaluation of antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China Chen, Xiaohua You, Yuan-Gang Yuan, You-Hua Yuan, Lian Chao Zhang, Ying Yan, Wen PLoS Negl Trop Dis Research Article OBJECTIVE: To evaluate antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China. METHODS: Eighty-three leprosy patients and 161 non-leprosy controls were enrolled from Hani-yi Autonomous Prefecture of Honghe, Yunnan Province, China. Leprosy patients were divided into multibacillary (MB, n = 38), paucibacillary (PB, n = 23), and post-multi-drug therapy (MDT, n = 22) groups. Controls were divided into the following groups: healthy household contacts (HHC, n = 119), tuberculosis (TB, n = 11), and endemic controls (EC, n = 31). The NDO-LID Rapid Test, M. leprae antigen-specific ELISA and antigen-specific IFN-γ secretion in a whole blood assay (WBA) were used to evaluate these subjects. RESULTS: The NDO-LID Rapid Test achieved higher positive response rates in MB than in PB patients[94.7%(36/38) vs 65.2%(15/23)], and these rates were higher than those observed by ELISA using anti-LID-1[92.1%(35/38) vs 52.2%(12/23)], anti-NDO-LID[92.1%(35/38) vs 47.8% (11/23)], and anti-ND-O-BSA[89.5%(34/38) vs 60.9%(14/23)]. However, the NDO-LID Rapid Test also showed a higher positive response rate in the EC group (33.3%,10/31), which was higher than the rates observed for anti-NDO-LID (12.9%,4/31) and anti-ND-O-BSA (16.1%,5/31). M. leprae antigen-specific ELISA demonstrated relatively high specificity (86.84–97.37%) but low sensitivity (15.97–72.73%) in discriminating between leprosy patients and non-leprosy controls by ROC curve analysis. In contrast, M. leprae antigen-specific IFN-γ secretion detection achieved higher positive response rates in PB than in MB patients (positive ratio of MB vs PB: 40% vs 56% for LID-1, 28.6% vs 47.8% for ML89, 31.4% vs 60.7% for ML2044, and 31.4 vs 47.8% for ML2028) and could distinguish MB from EC when stimulated with ML89(AUC = 0.6664) and PB fromTB when stimulated with ML2044 and ML2028(AUC = 0.7549 and 0.7372, respectively). CONCLUSION: The NDO-LID Rapid Test and M. leprae antigen-specific ELISA are useful tools to assist in the diagnosis of leprosy patients, especially MB patients, although the former had higher sensitivity but lower specificity than the latter. M. leprae antigen-specific IFN-γ release assessed by WBA has diagnostic value for distinguishing PB from TB but not for distinguishing PB from HHC or EC. Screening novel M. leprae-specific antigens, combining different M. leprae antigens and a multi-cytokine analyte model may be needed for more effective diagnosis of leprosy. Public Library of Science 2018-09-24 /pmc/articles/PMC6152862/ /pubmed/30248098 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0006777 Text en © 2018 Chen et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Chen, Xiaohua
You, Yuan-Gang
Yuan, You-Hua
Yuan, Lian Chao
Zhang, Ying
Yan, Wen
Evaluation of antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China
title Evaluation of antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China
title_full Evaluation of antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China
title_fullStr Evaluation of antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China
title_short Evaluation of antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in China
title_sort evaluation of antigen-specific immune responses for leprosy diagnosis in a hyperendemic area in china
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6152862/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30248098
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0006777
work_keys_str_mv AT chenxiaohua evaluationofantigenspecificimmuneresponsesforleprosydiagnosisinahyperendemicareainchina
AT youyuangang evaluationofantigenspecificimmuneresponsesforleprosydiagnosisinahyperendemicareainchina
AT yuanyouhua evaluationofantigenspecificimmuneresponsesforleprosydiagnosisinahyperendemicareainchina
AT yuanlianchao evaluationofantigenspecificimmuneresponsesforleprosydiagnosisinahyperendemicareainchina
AT zhangying evaluationofantigenspecificimmuneresponsesforleprosydiagnosisinahyperendemicareainchina
AT yanwen evaluationofantigenspecificimmuneresponsesforleprosydiagnosisinahyperendemicareainchina