03579nas a2200397 4500000000100000008004100001260001600042653001500058653001000073653000900083653002200092653002600114653002400140653002300164653001100187653001100198653001200209653000900221653001600230653002500246653001600271100001500287700001500302700001600317700001300333700001300346700001100359700001300370245010100383856008000484300000700564490000700571050001600578520257300594022001403167 2011 d c2011 Jan 2610aAdolescent10aAdult10aAged10aAged, 80 and over10aAntibodies, Bacterial10aAntigens, Bacterial10aBacterial Vaccines10aFemale10aHumans10aleprosy10aMale10aMiddle Aged10aMycobacterium leprae10aYoung Adult1 aSampaio LS1 aStefani MM1 aOliveira RM1 aSousa AL1 aIreton G1 aReed S1 aDuthie M00aImmunologically reactive M. leprae antigens with relevance to diagnosis and vaccine development. uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3040138/pdf/1471-2334-11-26.pdf a260 v11 aSAMPAIO20113 a

BACKGROUND: Leprosy is a chronic infectious disease caused by Mycobacterium leprae that can manifest a wide variety of immunological and clinical outcomes ranging from potent humoral responses among borderline lepromatous (BL) and lepromatous (LL) patients to strong cellular responses among tuberculoid (TT) and borderline tuberculoid (BT) patients. Until recently, relatively little has been known about the immune responses to individual proteins of M. leprae recognized during leprosy.

METHODS: The immune reactivity to a panel of 33 M. leprae recombinant proteins was evaluated among leprosy patients and controls from a high endemic area for leprosy (Goiania/GO, Central Brazil). Serum IgG responses were measured by ELISA (45 participants/group) and T cell responses (20 participants/group) were evaluated by IFN-gamma production in 24 hours whole blood cultures with antigen (whole blood assay-WBA). Study groups were newly diagnosed, untreated TT/BT and BL/LL leprosy patients classified by Ridley Jopling criteria and household contacts of BL/LL patients (HHC). Control groups were HIV-1 negative pulmonary tuberculosis patients (TB) and healthy individuals from the same endemic area (EC). In silico predictions indicated the level of identity of M. leprae proteins with homologues in other mycobacteria and the presence of T cell and B cell epitopes.

RESULTS: Despite the prediction that all proteins would be reactive, 16 of 33 (48%) of the single proteins tested were immunogenic (recognized in WBA or ELISA) and seventeen were non-immunogenic (not recognized in either assay). Among the 16 immunogenic proteins, 9 were considered leprosy specific in WBA inducing cell-mediated IFN-gamma secretion from TT/BT patients and HHC. Three of these proteins were also leprosy specific in serology being recognized by serum IgG from LL/BL patients. Seven of the immunogenic proteins were not leprosy specific.

CONCLUSIONS: New M. leprae antigens recognized by antibody responses of BL/LL patients and cellular responses of TT/BT leprosy patients were identified. An improved serological diagnostic test for leprosy could be developed by incorporating these IgG-reactive antigens to the current PGL-I based tests. Moreover our data indicate that the WBA is a robust, relatively simple and user friendly format for a T cell based diagnostic test. The field use of these test formats in leprosy endemic countries could contribute to early leprosy diagnosis before the development of deformities and disabilities.

 a1471-2334