Challenges in HIV and visceral Leishmania co-infection: future research directions

The nexus between Leishmania & HIV: Debilitating host immunity and Hastening Comorbid disease burden

The scintillating association between Leishmania and HIV has contributed exceptionally towards expansion of Visceral Leishmaniasis (VL) with Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS). The co-infection poses a grievous threat to elimination of VL and containment of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). When coinfected, Leishmania and HIV complement each other's proliferation and survival by inducing immunesenescence, T cell fatigue and exhaustion. Antigen presentation is lost, co-stimulatory molecules are diminished whereas co-inhibitory molecules such as CTLA-4, TIGIT, LAG-3 etc. are upregulated to ensure a Th2-baised immune environment. As a consequence, Leishmania-HIV coinfection causes poor outcomes, inflates the spread of Leishmania parasites, enhances the severity of side-effects to drugs, as well as escalate the probability of treatment failure and mortality. What makes control extremely strenuous is that there are frequent episodes of VL relapse with no prognostic markers, no standard immunophenotype(s) and appearance of atypical clinical symptoms. Thus, a standard therapeutic regimen has been difficult to develop and treatment is majorly dependent upon a combination of liposomal Amphotericin B and Miltefosine, a therapy that is expensive and capable of causing drastic side-effects in recipients. As World Health Organization is committed to eliminate both VL and HIV in due course of future, the existing therapeutic interventions require advancements to grapple and overcome this hazardous co-infection. In this context, an overview of HIV-VL co-infection, immunopathology of HIV and Leishmania co-inhabitance, available therapeutic options and their limitations in the treatment of co-infection are discussed in-depth.

Vulnerabilities to and the Socioeconomic and Psychosocial Impacts of the Leishmaniases: A Review

The leishmaniases are a group of four vector-borne neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) with 1.6 billion people in some 100 countries at risk. They occur in certain eco-epidemiological foci that reflect manipulation by human activities, such as migration, urbanization and deforestation, of which poverty, conflict and climate change are key drivers. Given their synergistic impacts, risk factors and the vulnerabilities of poor populations and the launch of a new 2030 roadmap for NTDs in the context of the global sustainability agenda, it is warranted to update the state of knowledge of the leishmaniases and their effects. Using existing literature, we review socioeconomic and psychosocial impacts of leishmaniasis within a framework of risk factors and vulnerabilities to help inform policy interventions. Studies show that poverty is an overarching primary risk factor. Low-income status fosters inadequate housing, malnutrition and lack of sanitation, which create and exacerbate complexities in access to care and treatment outcomes as well as education and awareness. The co-occurrence of the leishmaniases with malnutrition and HIV infection further complicate diagnosis and treatment, leading to poor diagnostic outcomes and therapeutic response. Even with free treatment, households may suffer catastrophic health expenditure from direct and indirect medical costs, which compounds existing financial strain in low-income communities for households and healthcare systems. The dermatological presentations of the leishmaniases may result in long-term severe disfigurement, leading to stigmatization, reduced quality of life, discrimination and mental health issues. A substantial amount of recent literature points to the vulnerability pathways and burden of leishmaniasis on women, in particular, who disproportionately suffer from these impacts. These emerging foci demonstrate a need for continued international efforts to address key risk factors and population vulnerabilities if leishmaniasis control, and ultimately elimination, is to be achieved by 2030.

Cutaneous and Mucocutaneous Leishmaniasis

Leishmaniasis is a chronic disease caused by flagellate protozoa of the genus Leishmania. It is a global disease, but most cases are seen in South America, the Mediterranean, and some areas of Asia and Africa. The 3 main types of leishmaniasis are cutaneous (the most common), mucocutaneous, and visceral (the most severe). Visceral leishmaniasis is also known as kala-azar. Leishmaniasis is diagnosed by demonstrating the presence of Leishmania amastigotes in clinical specimens using direct microscopic examination or molecular analysis. Various treatments exist, although the evidence supporting the options available for cutaneous leishmaniasis is weak. Both the classical presentation of leishmaniasis and our management of the disease have changed in recent decades because of acquired immune deficiency caused by conditions such as human immunodeficiency infection or the use of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors.

Cutaneous and Mucocutaneous Leishmaniasis

Leishmaniasis is a chronic disease caused by flagellate protozoa of the genus Leishmania. It is a global disease, but most cases are seen in South America, the Mediterranean, and some areas of Asia and Africa. The 3 main types of leishmaniasis are cutaneous (the most common), mucocutaneous, and visceral (the most severe). Visceral leishmaniasis is also known as kala-azar. Leishmaniasis is diagnosed by demonstrating the presence of Leishmania amastigotes in clinical specimens using direct microscopic examination or molecular analysis. Various treatments exist, although the evidence supporting the options available for cutaneous leishmaniasis is weak. Both the classical presentation of leishmaniasis and our management of the disease have changed in recent decades because of acquired immune deficiency caused by conditions such as HIV infection or the use of TNF inhibitors.

Cutaneous leishmaniasis: A great imitator

Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) is called "the great imitator," because it can mimic almost all types of dermatoses. This similarity may sometimes lead to misdiagnosis, resulting in inappropriate treatment and morbidities. Atypical forms occur due to the interaction between parasitic factors and the host immune response. Secondary infection or mistreatment of CL can also alter the natural course, resulting in bizarre and misdiagnosed cases. Atypical leishmaniasis should be considered in longstanding and painless lesions that may simulate erysipelas, dermatitis, verruca, herpes zoster, paronychia, and sporotrichosis. Less commonly, sarcoidosis, deep mycosis, basal and squamous cell carcinoma, cutaneous lymphoma, or pseudolymphomalike lesions may need to be considered in the differential diagnosis. A high index of suspicion is required to consider a diagnosis of CL, especially in nonendemic or newly endemic regions. Smear, histopathologic examination, culture, and polymerase chain reaction serve as important tools to differentiate CL from its clinical and histologic look-alikes. CL is discussed from various perspectives, with emphasis on CL and its broad differential diagnosis.

Visceral leishmaniasis and HIV coinfection: current perspectives

Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is caused by Leishmania donovani and Leishmania infantum. The burden of VL is concentrated in tropical and subtropical areas; however, HIV infection has spread VL over a hyperendemic area. Several outcomes are observed as a result of VL–HIV coinfection. Impacts are observed in immunopathogenesis, clinical manifestation, diagnosis, and therapeutic response. Concerning clinical manifestation, typical and unusual manifestation has been observed during active VL in HIV-infected patient, as well as alteration in immunoresponse, inducing greater immunosuppression by low CD4 T-lymphocyte count or even by induction of immunoactivation, with cell senescence. Serological diagnosis of VL in the HIV-infected is poor, due to low humoral response, characterized by antibody production, so parasitological methods are more recommended. Another important and even more challenging point is the definition of the best therapeutic regimen for VL in HIV-coinfected patients, because in this population there is greater failure and consequently higher mortality. The challenge of better understanding immunopathogenesis in order to obtain more effective therapies is one of the crucial points to be developed. The combination of drugs and the use of secondary prophylaxis associated with highly active antiretroviral therapy may be the best tool for treatment of HIV coinfection. Some derivatives from natural sources have action against Leishmania; however, studies have been limited to in vitro evaluation, without clinical trials.

Leishmaniasis

Leishmaniasis is a poverty-related disease with two main clinical forms: visceral leishmaniasis and cutaneous leishmaniasis. An estimated 0·7-1 million new cases of leishmaniasis per year are reported from nearly 100 endemic countries. The number of reported visceral leishmaniasis cases has decreased substantially in the past decade as a result of better access to diagnosis and treatment and more intense vector control within an elimination initiative in Asia, although natural cycles in transmission intensity might play a role. In east Africa however, the case numbers of this fatal disease continue to be sustained. Increased conflict in endemic areas of cutaneous leishmaniasis and forced displacement has resulted in a surge in these endemic areas as well as clinics across the world. WHO lists leishmaniasis as one of the neglected tropical diseases for which the development of new treatments is a priority. Major evidence gaps remain, and new tools are needed before leishmaniasis can be definitively controlled.

Leishmaniasis-HIV coinfection: current challenges

Leishmaniasis – human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection can manifest itself as tegumentary or visceral leishmaniasis. Almost 35 countries have reported autochthonous coinfections. Visceral leishmaniasis is more frequently described. However, usual and unusual manifestations of tegumentary leishmaniasis have been reported mainly in the Americas, but the real prevalence of Leishmania infection in HIV-infected patients is not clear. Regarding the clinical manifestations, there are some reports showing unusual manifestations in visceral leishmaniasis and tegumentary leishmaniasis in HIV-infected patients; yet, the usual manifestations are more frequent. Leishmaniasis diagnosis relies on clinical methods, but serological tests are used to diagnose visceral leishmaniasis despite them having a low sensitivity to tegumentary leishmaniasis. The search for the parasite is used to diagnose both visceral leishmaniasis and tegumentary leishmaniasis. Nevertheless, in HIV-infected patients, the sensitivity of serology is very low. Drugs available to treat leishmaniasis are more restricted and cause severe side effects. Furthermore, in HIV-infected patients, these side effects are more prominent and relapses and lethality are more recurrent. In this article, we discuss the current challenges of tegumentary leishmaniasis and visceral leishmaniasis–HIV infection, focusing mainly on the clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment of leishmaniasis.

Antileishmanial activity of antiretroviral drugs combined with miltefosine

Co-infection of Leishmaniasis, a neglected tropical disease, with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has hindered treatment efficacy. In this study, we aim to evaluate the antileishmanial activity of two protease inhibitors (darunavir and atazanavir) and four reverse transcriptase inhibitors (tenofovir, efavirenz, neviraprine, and delavirdine mesylate) on Leishmania infantum. The activity of different antiretrovirals combinations and of antiretroviral with miltefosine, a drug used on leishmaniasis treatment, was also evaluated. Only two non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) were active on L. infantum. Efavirenz showed the best antileishmanial activity on promastigotes cells with IC50 value of 26.1 μM followed by delavirdine mesylate with an IC50 value of 136.2 μM. Neviraprine, tenofovir, atazanavir, and darunavir were not active at the concentrations tested (IC50 > 200 μM). The efavirenz also showed high antileishmanial activity on intramacrophage amastigotes with IC50 of 12.59 μM. The interaction of efavirenz with miltefosine improved antileishmanial activity on promastigotes and intracellular amastigotes (IC50 values of 11. 8 μM and 8.89 μM, respectively). These results suggest that combined-therapy including efavirenz and miltefosine could be alternative options for treating Leishmaniasis and Leishmania/HIV co-infections.

Atypical manifestations of visceral leishmaniasis in patients with HIV in north Ethiopia: a gap in guidelines for the management of opportunistic infections in resource poor settings

In regions where it is endemic, visceral leishmaniasis is an important opportunistic infectious disease in people living with HIV. Typically, clinical presentation of visceral leishmaniasis includes chronic fever, hepatosplenomegaly, and weight loss. In Leishmania infantum endemic regions in Europe, atypical visceral leishmaniasis presentations have been well documented, with almost every possible organ involved. However, such reports are rare in Leishmania donovani endemic regions such as east Africa. In this Personal View, we describe the various atypical disease presentations in patients screened as part of an HIV and visceral leishmaniasis clinical trial in north Ethiopia, where up to 40% of patients with visceral leishmaniasis are co-infected with HIV. Atypical presentations such as these are not covered in clinical guidelines used in these settings. Apart from the lack of diagnostic facilities, this gap contributes to the underdiagnosis of atypical visceral leishmaniasis, with associated morbidity and mortality. Involvement of clinicians experienced with the management of HIV and visceral leishmaniasis co-infection in the development of HIV clinical guidelines in affected regions is warranted.