Prospective immunological follow-up in household contacts of Mexican leprosy patients |
| |
Authors: | M E Amezcua A Escobar-Gutiérrez J Barba-Rubio J V Cázares E Mayén M Chávez-Nú?ez R C Pe?a R Rodríguez S Pastén |
| |
Affiliation: | Laboratory for Mycobacterial Research, Instituto Nacional de Diagnóstico y Referencia Epidemiológicos, Secretaría de Salud México. |
| |
Abstract: | A 6-year prospective study of 79 household contacts of leprosy cases was made in order to correlate the development of the disease with their specific T-cell immunity, measured by the Mitsuda test, and levels of anti-Mycobacterium leprae antibodies determined in three consecutive observations with the FLA-ABS test. Overall in the contacts, 71.7% were Mitsuda positive and 93.6% showed seropositivity, without regard to their age, sex, or leprosy type of their index case. Households were divided into lower-risk and higher-risk groups according to either the paucibacillary or multibacillary character of their index case. The lower-risk group consisted of 19 contacts of 2 tuberculoid (TT) and 5 indeterminate cases. The higher-risk group was made up of 60 household contacts of 18 active lepromatous (LL) cases. All but two contacts in the former group had a positive Mitsuda reaction; the most common antibody titer was 1:160, with a tendency to stabilize or decrease over time. In the two Mitsuda-negative contacts, increased antibody levels were observed. In the higher-risk group, 61.6% were Mitsuda positive and showed a humoral profile similar to those Mitsuda positive in the lower-risk group. In most of the Mitsuda-negative LL contacts, the antibody levels remained constant or progressively increased, suggesting a high probability of active subclinical infection. This assumption was partially supported by the finding of a new borderline lepromatous (BL) leprosy case in the Mitsuda-negative LL contact group. Nevertheless, the contribution of the close and extensive contact with a multibacilliferous case as a risk factor was difficult to evaluate because of the small size of the sample studied. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|