Negligible risk of inducing resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis with single-dose rifampicin as post-exposure prophylaxis for leprosy

Rifampicin and its neuroprotective properties in humans - A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Rifampicin is an antimicrobial drug used in the treatment of mycobacterial and gram-positive bacterial infections. In vitro studies suggest additional rifampicin-associated reduction of neurotoxicity. The aim of this study was to review the evidence for neuroprotective effects of rifampicin in infectious and non-infectious diseases in human studies.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was done in MEDLINE and Embase including studies from 1 Jan 1946/47-20 Jan 2024, in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022349852). Original articles investigating the effect of rifampicin on infections of the central nervous system (CNS) or on neurodegenerating diseases, were included. Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were done using the Covidence software. Two authors assessed and extracted articles independently and blinded to each other.

RESULTS

1438 articles were identified of which eight were included in the final analysis: Four studies included patients with infectious diseases and four studies with neurodegenerative diseases. A neuroprotective effect of rifampicin was shown in five studies. The studies found reduced inflammatory parameters in the cerebrospinal fluid, improved neurological outcome, less cognitive decline, less brain atrophy or less metabolic decline on imaging as an effect of rifampicin. One RCT showed worsening of cognitive assessment scales in neurodegenerative patients.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests a neuroprotective effect of rifampicin in humans. As evaluation of neuroprotection is not standardized, a consensus definition for evaluation of clinical, radiological, and neuropsychological follow-up after pharmacological intervention would be helpful for future studies assessing neuroprotection.

A Review of the Efficacy, Safety, and Feasibility of Rifamycin-Based Post-Exposure Chemoprophylaxis for Leprosy

In 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommended scaling up leprosy prevention activities, including chemoprophylaxis, as one of the pillars of their 'Towards Zero Leprosy' strategy. This recommendation was primarily based on a 57% overall reduction in leprosy incidence among contacts who received chemoprophylaxis in the COLEP study conducted in Bangladesh. Since this landmark study, further research on the efficacy, feasibility, and implementation of leprosy chemoprophylaxis has been conducted. Additionally, concerns have been raised regarding the strength of evidence supporting the overall benefit of chemoprophylaxis and the potential for propagation of drug resistance in M. leprae strains. This literature review presents the current evidence for the efficacy and safety of rifamycin-based chemoprophylaxis in preventing clinical disease, and the feasibility of implementing chemoprophylaxis programmes. Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) has a reported efficacy of 45-80%, depending on the degree of case contact, the classification of the index case, the selected chemoprophylaxis regimen, the geographical setting, childhood BCG coverage and the implementation approach. As an intervention, it appears to be feasible, cost-effective, and acceptable to patients, contacts, and healthcare staff, with minimal harm. Implementation strategies need to be tailored to specific epidemiological and sociocultural settings for maximal benefit. Further research is required to optimise PEP regimens and strategies in various epidemiological settings and to assess the impact of these programmes on the susceptibility profile of local M. leprae strains.

Effectiveness of ongoing single dose rifampicin post-exposure prophylaxis (SDR-PEP) implementation under routine programme conditions-An observational study in Nepal

BACKGROUND/INTRODUCTION

Leprosy control remains a challenge in Nepal. Single-dose rifampicin post-exposure prophylaxis (SDR-PEP) shows promise in reducing leprosy incidence among contacts of index cases, contributing to reducing the transmission of Mycobacterium (M.) leprae. This study evaluates the effectiveness of routine SDR-PEP implementation in Nepal in addition to contact screening, focusing on its impact on reducing leprosy risk among contacts and potential population-level effects.

METHODOLOGY

We conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare leprosy case notification rates and leprosy risk among close contacts. We compared two districts implementing SDR-PEP (the intervention group) and two without (the comparator group). Data from 2015 onwards included demographics, index case types, and contact relationships. Statistical analyses, including Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier survival curves, assessed the impact of SDR-PEP implementation.

FINDINGS

All four districts showed a decrease in case notification rates since 2015, with the steepest decline in the intervention districts. The risk of developing leprosy among contacts was significantly lower in the intervention districts (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.18-0.44). SDR-PEP offered 72% protection, consistent over time, as shown in Kaplan-Meier plots. The protective effect was equally strong in blood-related contacts (HR 0.29 versus 0.27 in others, p = 0.32), and the proportion of MB cases among incident cases was not significantly different post-PEP (51.4% vs. 53.6%, p = 0.82).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the substantial protective effect of integrating SDR-PEP in routine leprosy control programs with contact screening, significantly lowering leprosy risk among contacts. SDR-PEP is equally effective for blood-related contacts and does not preferentially prevent PB cases. While suggesting potential population-level impact, the study design does not allow for firm conclusions at this level. Further research is needed to fully assess SDR-PEP's effectiveness in diverse contexts and optimize its implementation. Integrating SDR-PEP within well-organized contact screening programs is effective and is expected to reduce leprosy transmission when applied as a rolling intervention.

Leprosy

Leprosy, a neglected tropical disease, causes significant morbidity in marginalized communities. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, annual new case detection plateaued for over a decade at ~200,000 new cases. The clinical phenotypes of leprosy strongly parallel host immunity to its causative agents Mycobacterium leprae and Mycobacterium lepromatosis. The resulting spectrum spans from paucibacillary leprosy, characterized by vigorous pro-inflammatory immunity with few bacteria, to multibacillary leprosy, harbouring large numbers of bacteria with high levels of seemingly non-protective, anti-M. leprae antibodies. Leprosy diagnosis remains clinical, leaving asymptomatic individuals with infection undetected. Antimicrobial treatment is effective with recommended multidrug therapy for 6 months for paucibacillary leprosy and 12 months for multibacillary leprosy. The incubation period ranges from 2 to 6 years, although longer periods have been described. Given this lengthy incubation period and dwindling clinical expertise, there is an urgent need to create innovative, low-complexity diagnostic tools for detection of M. leprae infection. Such advancements are vital for enabling swift therapeutic and preventive interventions, ultimately transforming patient outcomes. National health-care programmes should prioritize early case detection and consider post-exposure prophylaxis for individuals in close contact with affected persons. These measures will help interrupt transmission, prevent disease progression, and mitigate the risk of nerve damage and disabilities to achieve the WHO goal 'Towards Zero Leprosy' and reduce the burden of leprosy.

Safety of single-dose bedaquiline combined with rifampicin for leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis: A Phase 2 randomized non-inferiority trial in the Comoros Islands

BACKGROUND

To reduce leprosy risk in contacts of patients with leprosy by around 50%, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) using single-dose rifampicin (SDR). Results from a cluster randomized trial in the Comoros and Madagascar suggest that PEP with a double dose of rifampicin led to a similar reduction in incident leprosy, prompting the need for stronger PEP. The objective of this Phase 2 trial was to assess safety of a bedaquiline-enhanced PEP regimen (intervention arm, bedaquiline 800 mg with rifampicin 600 mg, BE-PEP), relative to the WHO recommended PEP with rifampicin 600 mg alone (control arm, SDR-PEP).

METHODS AND FINDINGS

From July 2022 to January 2023, consenting participants were screened for eligibility, including a heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTc) <450 ms and liver enzyme tests (ALT/AST) below 3× the upper limit of normal (ULN), before they were individually randomized 1:1 in an open-label design. Recruitment was sequential, by age group. Pediatric dosages were weight adjusted. Follow-up was done at day 1 post-dose (including ECG) and day 14 (including ALT/AST), with repeat of ALT/AST on the last follow-up at day 30 in case of elevation on day 14. The primary outcome was non-inferiority of BE-PEP based on a <10 ms difference in QTc 24 h after treatment administration, both unadjusted and adjusted for baseline QTc. Of 408 screened participants, 313 were enrolled, starting with 187 adults, then 38 children aged 13 to 17 years, and finally 88 children aged 5 to 12 years, of whom 310 (99%) completed all visits. Across all ages, the mean QTc change on BE-PEP was from 393 ms to 396 ms, not significantly different from the change from 392 ms to 394 ms on SDR-PEP (difference between arms 1.8 ms, 95% CI -1.8, 5.3, p = 0.41). No individual's QTc increased by >50 ms or exceeded 450 ms after PEP administration. Per protocol, all children were analyzed together, with no significant difference in mean QTc increase for BE-PEP compared to SDR-PEP, although non-inferiority of BE-PEP in children was not demonstrated in unadjusted analysis, as the upper limit of the 95% CI of 10.4 ms exceeded the predefined margin of 10 ms. Adjusting for baseline QTc, the regression coefficient and 95% CI (3.3; -1.4, 8.0) met the 10 ms non-inferiority margin. No significant differences in ALT or AST levels were noted between the intervention and control arms, although a limitation of the study was false elevation of ALT/AST during adult recruitment due to a technical error. In both study arms, one serious adverse event was reported, both considered unlikely related to the study drugs. Dizziness, nausea, headache, and diarrhea among adults, and headaches in children, were nonsignificantly more frequently observed in the BE-PEP group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we observed that safety of single-dose bedaquiline 800 mg in combination with rifampicin is comparable to rifampicin alone, although non-inferiority of QTc changes was demonstrated in children only after adjusting for the baseline QTc measurements. A Phase 3 cluster randomized efficacy trial is currently ongoing in the Comoros.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05406479.

An update of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of leprosy: A narrative review

Leprosy is an infectious disease that remains a public health concern. It is caused by acid-fast Bacillus leprae, which primarily affects the skin and peripheral nerves, potentially leading to long-term disability and stigma. However, current and previous efforts have focused on developing better diagnostic and therapeutic interventions for leprosy, and its prevention needs to be addressed. In this review, we organize the currently published papers and provide updates on the global epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of leprosy. Several online databases, including MEDLINE (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD), PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, were searched to collect relevant published papers. As a public health issue, the World Health Organization set the goal of leprosy elimination with a prevalence of <1 case per 10,000 people, which was achieved in 2000 and in most countries by 2010, mainly owing to the treatment of leprosy using drugs starting in 1980 and no-cost access for patients since 1995. Although diagnostic and therapeutic techniques have improved, the new occurrence of leprosy remains a critical global disease burden. With continuous technological improvements in diagnosing and treating leprosy, obtaining more relevant healthcare knowledge and preventing leprosy disability are crucial.

Post-exposure prophylaxis in leprosy (PEOPLE): a cluster randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) using single-dose rifampicin reduces progression from infection with Mycobacterium leprae to leprosy disease. We compared effectiveness of different administration modalities, using a higher (20 mg/kg) dose of rifampicin-single double-dose rifampicin (SDDR)-PEP.

METHODS

We did a cluster randomised study in 16 villages in Madagascar and 48 villages in Comoros. Villages were randomly assigned to four study arms and inhabitants were screened once a year for leprosy, for 4 consecutive years. All permanent residents (no age restriction) were eligible to participate and all identified patients with leprosy were treated with multidrug therapy (SDDR-PEP was provided to asymptomatic contacts aged ≥2 years). Arm 1 was the comparator arm, in which no PEP was provided. In arm 2, SDDR-PEP was provided to household contacts of patients with leprosy, whereas arm 3 extended SDDR-PEP to anyone living within 100 m. In arm 4, SDDR-PEP was offered to household contacts and to anyone living within 100 m and testing positive to anti-phenolic glycolipid-I. The main outcome was the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of leprosy between the comparator arm and each of the intervention arms. We also assessed the individual protective effect of SDDR-PEP and explored spatial associations. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03662022, and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 11, 2019, and Jan 16, 2023, we enrolled 109 436 individuals, of whom 95 762 had evaluable follow-up data. Our primary analysis showed a non-significant reduction in leprosy incidence in arm 2 (IRR 0·95), arm 3 (IRR 0·80), and arm 4 (IRR 0·58). After controlling for baseline prevalence, the reduction in arm 3 became stronger and significant (IRR 0·56, p=0·0030). At an individual level SDDR-PEP was also protective with an IRR of 0·55 (p=0·0050). Risk of leprosy was two to four times higher for those living within 75 m of an index patient at baseline.

INTERPRETATION

SDDR-PEP appears to protect against leprosy but less than anticipated. Strong spatial associations were observed within 75 m of index patients. Targeted door-to-door screening around index patients complemented by a blanket SDDR-PEP approach will probably have a substantial effect on transmission.

FUNDING

European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership.

TRANSLATION

For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

The PEP++ study protocol: a cluster-randomised controlled trial on the effectiveness of an enhanced regimen of post-exposure prophylaxis for close contacts of persons affected by leprosy to prevent disease transmission

BACKGROUND

Leprosy is an infectious disease with a slow decline in global annual caseload in the past two decades. Active case finding and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) with a single dose of rifampicin (SDR) are recommended by the World Health Organization as measures for leprosy elimination. However, more potent PEP regimens are needed to increase the effect in groups highest at risk (i.e., household members and blood relatives, especially of multibacillary patients). The PEP++ trial will assess the effectiveness of an enhanced preventive regimen against leprosy in high-endemic districts in India, Brazil, Bangladesh, and Nepal compared with SDR-PEP.

METHODS

The PEP++ study is a cluster-randomised controlled trial in selected districts of India, Brazil, Bangladesh, and Nepal. Sub-districts will be allocated randomly to the intervention and control arms. Leprosy patients detected from 2015 - 22 living in the districts will be approached to list their close contacts for enrolment in the study. All consenting participants will be screened for signs and symptoms of leprosy and tuberculosis (TB). In the intervention arm, eligible contacts receive the enhanced PEP++ regimen with three doses of rifampicin (150 - 600 mg) and clarithromycin (150 - 500 mg) administered at four-weekly intervals, whereas those in the control arm receive SDR-PEP. Follow-up screening for leprosy will be done for each individual two years after the final dose is administered. Cox' proportion hazards analysis and Poisson regression will be used to compare the incidence rate ratios between the intervention and control areas as the primary study outcome.

DISCUSSION

Past studies have shown that the level of SDR-PEP effectiveness is not uniform across contexts or in relation to leprosy patients. To address this, a number of recent trials are seeking to strengthen PEP regimens either through the use of new medications or by increasing the dosage of the existing ones. However, few studies focus on the impact of multiple doses of chemoprophylaxis using a combination of antibiotics. The PEP++ trial will investigate effectiveness of both an enhanced regimen and use geospatial analysis for PEP administration in the study communities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NL7022 on the Dutch Trial Register on April 12, 2018. Protocol version 9.0 updated on 18 August 2022 https://www.onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/23060.

Leprosy: treatment, prevention, immune response and gene function

Since the leprosy cases have fallen dramatically, the incidence of leprosy has remained stable over the past years, indicating that multidrug therapy seems unable to eradicate leprosy. More seriously, the emergence of rifampicin-resistant strains also affects the effectiveness of treatment. Immunoprophylaxis was mainly carried out through vaccination with the BCG but also included vaccines such as LepVax and MiP. Meanwhile, it is well known that the infection and pathogenesis largely depend on the host's genetic background and immunity, with the onset of the disease being genetically regulated. The immune process heavily influences the clinical course of the disease. However, the impact of immune processes and genetic regulation of leprosy on pathogenesis and immunological levels is largely unknown. Therefore, we summarize the latest research progress in leprosy treatment, prevention, immunity and gene function. The comprehensive research in these areas will help elucidate the pathogenesis of leprosy and provide a basis for developing leprosy elimination strategies.

Engineered nanomaterials enhance drug delivery strategies for the treatment of osteosarcoma

Osteosarcoma (OS) is the most common malignant bone tumor in adolescents, and the clinical treatment of OS mainly includes surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. However, the side effects of chemotherapy drugs are an issue that clinicians cannot ignore. Nanomedicine and drug delivery technologies play an important role in modern medicine. The development of nanomedicine has ushered in a new turning point in tumor treatment. With the emergence and development of nanoparticles, nanoparticle energy surfaces can be designed with different targeting effects. Not only that, nanoparticles have unique advantages in drug delivery. Nanoparticle delivery drugs can not only reduce the toxic side effects of chemotherapy drugs, but due to the enhanced permeability retention (EPR) properties of tumor cells, nanoparticles can survive longer in the tumor microenvironment and continuously release carriers to tumor cells. Preclinical studies have confirmed that nanoparticles can effectively delay tumor growth and improve the survival rate of OS patients. In this manuscript, we present the role of nanoparticles with different functions in the treatment of OS and look forward to the future treatment of improved nanoparticles in OS.

Activation of Dynamin-Related Protein 1 and Induction of Mitochondrial Apoptosis by Exosome-Rifampicin Nanoparticles Exerts Anti-Osteosarcoma Effect

PURPOSE

To investigate induction of cell death in Osteosarcoma (OS) using the anti-tuberculosis drug, rifampicin, loaded into exosomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

BMSC-exosomes were isolated by ultracentrifugation and loaded ultrasonically with rifampicin. Nanoparticle exosome-rifampicin (EXO-RIF) was added to the OS cell-lines, 143B and MG63, in vitro, to observe the growth inhibitory effect. In vivo experiments were conducted by injecting fluorescently labeled EXO-RIF through the tail vein of 143B cell xenograft nude mice and tracking distribution. Therapeutic and toxic side-effects were analyzed systemically.

RESULTS

Sonication resulted in encapsulation of rifampicin into exosomes. Exosome treatment accelerated the entry of rifampicin into OS cells and enhanced the actions of rifampicin in inhibiting OS proliferation, migration and invasion. Cell cycle arrest at the G2/M phase was observed. Dynamin-related protein 1 (Drp1) was activated by EXO-RIF and caused mitochondrial lysis and apoptosis. Exosome treatment targeted rifampicin to the site of OS, causing OS apoptosis and improving mouse survival in vivo.

CONCLUSION

The potent Drp1 agonist, rifampicin, induced OS apoptosis and exosome loading, improving OS targeting and mouse survival rates. EXO-RIF is a promising strategy for the treatment of diverse malignancies.

Very-Rapidly Dissolving Printlets of Isoniazid Manufactured by SLS 3D Printing: In Vitro and In Vivo Characterization

The focus of this research was to understand the effects of formulation and processing variables on the very-rapidly dissolving printlets of isoniazid (INH) manufactured by the selective laser sintering (SLS) three-dimensional (3D) printing method, and to characterize their physicochemical properties, stability, and pharmacokinetics. Fifteen printlet formulations were manufactured by varying the laser scanning speed (400-500 mm/s, X₁), surface temperature (100-110 °C, X₂), and croscarmellose sodium (CCS, %, X₃), and the responses measured were weight (Y₁), hardness (Y₂), disintegration time (DT, Y₃), and dissolution (Y₄). Laser scanning was the most important processing factor affecting the responses. DT was very rapid (≥3 s), and dissolution (>99%) was completed within 3 min. The root-mean-square error in the studied responses was low and analysis of variance (ANOVA) was statistically significant (p < 0.05). X-ray micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) images showed very porous structures with 24.6-34.4% porosity. X-ray powder diffraction and differential scanning calorimetry data indicated partial conversion of the crystalline drug into an amorphous form. The printlets were stable at 40 °C/75% RH with no significant changes in assay and dissolution. Pharmacokinetic profiles of the printlets and compressed tablets were superimposable. In conclusion, the rapidly dissolving printlets of the INH were stable, and oral bioavailability was similar to that of compositionally identical compressed tablets.

Vigilance Needed in Treating Leprosy Patients in Accordance with WHO's AWaRe

BACKGROUND

Leprosy is a highly stigmatized disease that can range from a minor skin lesion to life-threatening conditions such as deformities and disability. The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed a tool called "Access, Watch, and Reserve" (AWaRe) to reduce antibiotic misuse and abuse.

AIM

The purpose of this review is to determine whether the drugs used in the leprosy treatment regimen are complied with the AWaRe programme, in order to improve the quality of hospital antibiotic use and reduce the incidence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR).

METHODS

We started by looking for antibiotics that are used in the treatment and chemoprophylaxis of leprosy, as defined by the WHO's AWaRe classification. Furthermore, we look for studies on antibiotics that showed sensitivity or less resistance after antimicrobial sensitivity testing (AST) on isolates from infected leprosy ulcers, as well as their AWaRe category.

RESULTS

There were 32 studies found, but only 5 of them met the inclusion criteria. They consisted of four cross-sectional studies and one descriptive retrospective study. A total of 19 antibiotics were identified in 5 studies, with 9 (47.4%) antibiotics in the access category, 8 (42.1%) antibiotics in the watch group, and 2 (10.5%) antibiotics in the reserve group.

CONCLUSION

As per our knowledge, this is the first study to explore antibiotics in leprosy treatment, chemoprophylaxis, and complications such as ulcer compliance with the AWaRe programme. Antimicrobial resistance is on the rise, which is a global issue that continues to pose challenges to clinical practices. This review may provide physicians with an overview of the current state of drug prescribing trends in leprosy, whether in accordance with the AWaRe classification in selecting the right drug when the use of antimicrobials is indicated and may also aid in rational drug prescribing.

PEP4LEP study protocol: integrated skin screening and SDR-PEP administration for leprosy prevention: comparing the effectiveness and feasibility of a community-based intervention to a health centre-based intervention in Ethiopia, Mozambique and Tanzania

INTRODUCTION

Leprosy, or Hansen's disease, remains a cause of preventable disability. Early detection, treatment and prevention are key to reducing transmission. Post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (SDR-PEP) reduces the risk of developing leprosy when administered to screened contacts of patients. This has been adopted in the WHO leprosy guidelines. The PEP4LEP study aims to determine the most effective and feasible method of screening people at risk of developing leprosy and administering chemoprophylaxis to contribute to interrupting transmission.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

PEP4LEP is a cluster-randomised implementation trial comparing two interventions of integrated skin screening combined with SDR-PEP distribution to contacts of patients with leprosy in Ethiopia, Mozambique and Tanzania. One intervention is community-based, using skin camps to screen approximately 100 community contacts per leprosy patient, and to administer SDR-PEP when eligible. The other intervention is health centre-based, inviting household contacts of leprosy patients to be screened in a local health centre and subsequently receive SDR-PEP when eligible. The mobile health (mHealth) tool SkinApp will support health workers' capacity in integrated skin screening. The effectiveness of both interventions will be compared by assessing the rate of patients with leprosy detected and case detection delay in months, as well as feasibility in terms of cost-effectiveness and acceptability.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the national ethical committees of Ethiopia (MoSHE), Mozambique (CNBS) and Tanzania (NIMR/MoHCDEC). Study results will be published open access in peer-reviewed journals, providing evidence for the implementation of innovative leprosy screening methods and chemoprophylaxis to policymakers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NL7294 (NTR7503).

Number of people requiring post-exposure prophylaxis to end leprosy: A modeling study

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, around 210,000 new cases of leprosy are detected annually. To end leprosy, i.e. zero new leprosy cases, preventive interventions such as contact tracing and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) are required. This study aims to estimate the number of people requiring PEP to reduce leprosy new case detection (NCD) at national and global level by 50% and 90%.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The individual-based model SIMCOLEP was fitted to seven leprosy settings defined by NCD and MB proportion. Using data of all 110 countries with known leprosy patients in 2016, we assigned each country to one of these settings. We predicted the impact of administering PEP to about 25 contacts of leprosy patients on the annual NCD for 25 years and estimated the number of contacts requiring PEP per country for each year. The NCD trends show an increase in NCD in the first year (i.e. backlog cases) followed by a significant decrease thereafter. A reduction of 50% and 90% of new cases would be achieved in most countries in 5 and 22 years if 20.6 and 40.2 million people are treated with PEP over that period, respectively. For India, Brazil, and Indonesia together, a total of 32.9 million people requiring PEP to achieve a 90% reduction in 22 years.

CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE

The leprosy problem is far greater than the 210,000 new cases reported annually. Our model estimates of the number of people requiring PEP to achieve significant reduction of new leprosy cases can be used by policymakers and program managers to develop long-term strategies to end leprosy.

A comprehensive research agenda for zero leprosy

BACKGROUND

Leprosy control achieved dramatic success in the 1980s-1990s with the implementation of short course multidrug therapy, which reduced the global prevalence of leprosy to less than 1 in 10 000 population. However, a period of relative stagnation in leprosy control followed this achievement, and only limited further declines in the global number of new cases reported have been achieved over the past decade.

MAIN TEXT

In 2016, major stakeholders called for the development of an innovative and comprehensive leprosy strategy aimed at reducing the incidence of leprosy, lowering the burden of disability and discrimination, and interrupting transmission. This led to the establishment of the Global Partnership for Zero Leprosy (GPZL) in 2018, with partners aligned around a shared Action Framework committed to achieving the WHO targets by 2030 through national leprosy program capacity-building, resource mobilisation and an enabling research agenda. GPZL convened over 140 experts from more than 20 countries to develop a research agenda to achieve zero leprosy. The result is a detailed research agenda focusing on diagnostics, mapping, digital technology and innovation, disability, epidemiological modelling and investment case, implementation research, stigma, post exposure prophylaxis and transmission, and vaccines. This research agenda is aligned with the research priorities identified by other stakeholders.

CONCLUSIONS

Developing and achieving consensus on the research agenda for zero leprosy is a significant step forward for the leprosy community. In a next step, research programmes must be developed, with individual components of the research agenda requiring distinct expertise, varying in resource needs, and operating over different timescales. Moving toward zero leprosy now requires partner alignment and new investments at all stages of the research process, from discovery to implementation.

The State of Affairs in Post-Exposure Leprosy Prevention: A Descriptive Meta-Analysis on Immuno- and Chemo-Prophylaxis

OBJECTIVE

Annually, over 200,000 people are diagnosed with leprosy, also called Hansen's disease. This number has been relatively stable over the past years. Progress has been made in the fields of chemoprophylaxis and immunoprophylaxis to prevent leprosy, with a primary focus on close contacts of patients. In this descriptive meta-analysis, we summarize the evidence and identify knowledge gaps regarding post-exposure prophylaxis against leprosy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology was conducted by searching the medical scientific databases Cochrane, Embase, Pubmed/MEDLINE, Research Gate, Scopus and Web of Science on Jan. 22, 2020, using a combination of synonyms for index terms in four languages: "leprosy" and "population" or "contacts" and "prevention" or "prophylaxis." Subsequently, Infolep.org and Google Scholar were searched and the "snowball method" was used to retrieve other potentially relevant literature. The found articles were screened for eligibility using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria.

RESULTS

After deduplication, 1,515 articles were screened, and 125 articles were included in this descriptive meta-analysis. Immunoprophylaxis by bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination is known to provide protection against leprosy. The protection it offers is higher in household contacts of leprosy patients compared with the general population and is seen to decline over time. Contact follow-up screening is important in the first period after BCG administration, as a substantial number of new leprosy patients presents three months post-vaccination. Evidence for the benefit of re-vaccination is conflicting. The World Health Organization (WHO) included BCG in its Guidelines for the Diagnosis, Treatment and Prevention of Leprosy by stating that BCG at birth should be maintained in at least all leprosy high-burden regions. Literature shows that several vaccination interventions with other immunoprophylactic agents demonstrate similar or slightly less efficacy in leprosy risk reduction compared with BCG. However, most of these studies do not exclusively focus on post-exposure prophylaxis. Two vaccines are considered future candidates for leprosy prophylaxis: Mycobacterium indicus pranii (MiP) and LepVax. For chemoprophylaxis, trials were performed with dapsone/acedapsone, rifampicin, and ROM, a combination of rifampicin, ofloxacin, and minocycline. Single-dose rifampicin is favored as post-exposure prophylaxis, abbreviated as SDR-PEP. It demonstrated a protective effect of 57% in the first two years after administration to contacts of leprosy patients. It is inexpensive, and adverse events are rare. The risk of SDR-PEP inducing rifampicin resistance is considered negligible, but continuous monitoring in accordance with WHO policies should be encouraged. The integration of contact screening and SDR-PEP administration into different leprosy control programs was found to be feasible and well accepted. Since 2018, SDR-PEP is included in the WHO Guidelines for the Diagnosis, Treatment and Prevention of Leprosy.

CONCLUSION

Progress has been made in the areas of chemoprophylaxis and immunoprophylaxis to prevent leprosy in contacts of patients. Investing in vaccine studies, like LepVax and MiP, and increasing harmonization between tuberculosis (TB) and leprosy research groups is important. SDR-PEP is promising as a chemoprophylactic agent, and further implementation should be promoted. More chemoprophylaxis research is needed on: enhanced medication regimens; interventions in varying (epidemiological) settings, including focal mass drug administration (fMDA); specific approaches per contact type; combinations with screening variations and field-friendly rapid tests, if available in the future; community and health staff education; ongoing antibiotic resistance surveillance; and administering chemoprophylaxis with SDR-PEP prior to BCG administration. Additionally, both leprosy prophylactic drug registration nationally and prophylactic drug availability globally at low or no cost are important for the implementation and further upscaling of preventive measures against leprosy, such as SDR-PEP and new vaccines.

New Developments in Bacterial, Viral, and Fungal Cutaneous Infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review highlights clinically relevant updates to common and significant bacterial, viral, and fungal cutaneous infection within the past 5 years. Recent developments are presented so that the clinician may provide evidence-based, high-quality patient care.

RECENT FINDINGS

New resistance patterns in cutaneous pathogens have recently emerged as a result of inappropriate antimicrobial use. Several new FDA-approved antimicrobials have been approved to treat such infections, including multi-drug resistant pathogens. Several organizational guidelines for cutaneous infection management have been updated with new recommendations for screening, diagnostic, and treatment strategies.

SUMMARY

Clinicians should be aware of the most recent evidence and guidelines for the management of cutaneous infections in order to reduce the emergence of antimicrobial resistance and most effectively treat their patients.

Protocol, rationale and design of PEOPLE (Post ExpOsure Prophylaxis for LEprosy in the Comoros and Madagascar): a cluster randomized trial on effectiveness of different modalities of implementation of post-exposure prophylaxis of leprosy contacts

Background

Leprosy is an ancient infectious disease with a global annual incidence that has plateaued above 200,000 new cases since over a decade. New strategies are required to overcome this stalemate. Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) with a single dose of Rifampicin (SDR) has conditionally been recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), based on a randomized-controlled-trial in Bangladesh. More evidence is required. The Post ExpOsure Prophylaxis for Leprosy (PEOPLE) trial will assess effectiveness of different modalities of PEP on the Comoros and Madagascar.

Methods

PEOPLE is a cluster-randomized trial with villages selected on previous leprosy-incidence and randomly allocated to four arms. Four annual door-to-door surveys will be performed in all arms. All consenting permanent residents will be screened for leprosy. Leprosy patients will be treated according to international guidelines and eligible contacts will be provided with SDR-PEP.

Arm-1 is the comparator in which no PEP will be provided. In arms 2, 3 and 4, SDR-PEP will be provided at double the regular dose (20 mg/kg) to eligible contacts aged two years and above. In arm 2 all household-members of incident leprosy patients are eligible. In arm 3 not only household-members but also neighbourhood contacts living within 100-m of an incident case are eligible. In arm 4 such neighbourhood contacts are only eligible if they test positive to anti-PGL-I, a serological marker. Incidence rate ratios calculated between the comparator arm 1 and each of the intervention arms will constitute the primary outcome.

Discussion

Different trials on PEP have yielded varying results. The pivotal COLEP trial in Bangladesh showed a 57% reduction in incidence over a two-year period post-intervention without any rebound in the following years. A study in a high-incidence setting in Indonesia showed no effect of PEP provided to close contacts but a major effect of PEP provided as a blanket measure to an entire island population. High background incidence could be the reason of the lack of effect of PEP provided to individual contacts. The PEOPLE trial will assess effectiveness of PEP in a high incidence setting and will compare three different approaches, to identify who benefits most from PEP.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.Gov. NCT03662022. Initial Protocol Version 1.2, 27-Aug-2018.

Fingerstick test quantifying humoral and cellular biomarkers indicative for M. leprae infection

OBJECTIVES

New user-friendly diagnostic tests for detection of individuals infected by Mycobacterium leprae (M. leprae), the causative pathogen of leprosy, can help guide therapeutic and prophylactic treatment, thus positively contributing to clinical outcome and reduction of transmission. To facilitate point-of-care testing without the presence of phlebotomists, the use of fingerstick blood (FSB) rather than whole blood-derived serum is preferred. This study is a first proof-of-principle validating that previously described rapid serum tests detecting antibodies and cytokines can also be used with FSB.

METHODS

Quantitative detection of previously identified biomarkers for leprosy and M. leprae infection, anti-M. leprae PGL-I IgM antibodies (αPGL-I), IP-10 and CRP, was performed with lateral flow (LF) strips utilizing luminescent up-converting reporter particles (UCP) and a portable reader generating unbiased read-outs. Precise amounts of FSB samples were collected using disposable heparinized capillaries. Biomarker levels in paired FSB and serum samples were determined using UCP-LF test strips for leprosy patients and controls in Bangladesh, Brazil, South-Africa and the Netherlands.

RESULTS

Correlations between serum and FSB from the same individuals for αPGL-I, CRP and IP-10 were highly significant (p < .0001) even after FSB samples had been frozen. The αPGL-I FSB test was able to correctly identify all multibacillary leprosy patients presenting a good quantitative correlation with the bacterial index.

CONCLUSIONS

Reader-assisted, quantitative UCP-LF tests for the detection of humoral and cellular biomarkers for M. leprae infection, are compatible with FSB. This allows near-patient testing for M. leprae infection and immunomonitoring of treatment without highly trained staff. On site availability of test-result concedes immediate initiation of appropriate counselling and treatment. Alternatively, the UCP-LF format allows frozen storage of FSB samples compatible with deferred testing in central laboratories.

Current Situation of Leprosy in India and its Future Implications

The global leprosy situation has changed significantly over the last four decades after the introduction of multidrug therapy (MDT) in 1982 with a reduction in prevalence from over 5 million cases in the mid-1980s to less than 200,000 at the end of 2016. The programme in India also saw a reduction from a prevalence rate of 57.8/10,000 in 1983 to less than 1/10,000 by the end of 2005 when India declared to have reached the World Health Organization (WHO) target of elimination as a public health problem. Post 2005, major changes in the programme were made by the National leprosy eradication programme (NLEP) and the global leprosy programme, which may have affected the new case detection (NCD), disability, and child leprosy trends, which continue to show no appreciable regression. This article reviews the current global and Indian leprosy scenario to bring out its achievements and successes, including the impact of Leprosy Case Detection Campaigns (LCDC) on leprosy numbers. The basis and expected benefits of recent introduction of chemo and immune-prophylaxis in the programme are also discussed. It also discusses the shortcomings, the areas of concern, and the need for an inclusive strategy in the Indian leprosy programme that includes an intersectoral collaboration within the country for reaching the desired goal of leprosy eradication.

Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) programme: study protocol for evaluating the feasibility and impact on case detection rates of contact tracing and single dose rifampicin

INTRODUCTION

The reported number of new leprosy patients has barely changed in recent years. Thus, additional approaches or modifications to the current standard of passive case detection are needed to interrupt leprosy transmission. Large-scale clinical trials with single dose rifampicin (SDR) given as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to contacts of newly diagnosed patients with leprosy have shown a 50-60% reduction of the risk of developing leprosy over the following 2 years. To accelerate the uptake of this evidence and introduction of PEP into national leprosy programmes, data on the effectiveness, impact and feasibility of contact tracing and PEP for leprosy are required. The leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme was designed to obtain those data.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The LPEP programme evaluates feasibility, effectiveness and impact of PEP with SDR in pilot areas situated in several leprosy endemic countries: India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. Complementary sites are located in Brazil and Cambodia. From 2015 to 2018, contact persons of patients with leprosy are traced, screened for symptoms and assessed for eligibility to receive SDR. The intervention is implemented by the national leprosy programmes, tailored to local conditions and capacities, and relying on available human and material resources. It is coordinated on the ground with the help of the in-country partners of the International Federation of Anti-Leprosy Associations (ILEP). A robust data collection and reporting system is established in the pilot areas with regular monitoring and quality control, contributing to the strengthening of the national surveillance systems to become more action-oriented.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been obtained from the relevant ethics committees in the countries. Results and lessons learnt from the LPEP programme will be published in peer-reviewed journals and should provide important evidence and guidance for national and global policymakers to strengthen current leprosy elimination strategies.