Search

Background: Treatment guidance for children and older adult patients affected by cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) is unclear due to limited representation of these groups in clinical trials. Methods: We conducted a collaborative retrospective study to describe the effectiveness and safety of antileishmanial treatments in children ≤ 10 and adults ≥ 60 years of age, treated between 2014 and 2018 in ten CL referral centers in Latin America. Results: 2,037 clinical records were assessed for eligibility. Of them, the main reason for non-inclusion was lack of data on treatment follow-up and therapeutic response (182/242, 75% of children and 179/468, 38% of adults). Data on 1,325 eligible CL patients (736 children and 589 older adults) were analyzed. In both age groups, disease presentation was mild, with a median number of lesions of one (IQR: 1–2) and median lesion diameter of less than 3 cm. Less than 50% of the patients had data for two or more follow-up visits post-treatment (being only 28% in pediatric patients). Systemic antimonials were the most common monotherapy regimen in both age groups (590/736, 80.2% of children and 308/589, 52.3% of older adults) with overall cure rates of 54.6% (95% CI: 50.5–58.6%) and 68.2% (95% CI: 62.6–73.4%), respectively. Other treatments used include miltefosine, amphotericin B, intralesional antimonials, and pentamidine. Adverse reactions related to the main treatment were experienced in 11.9% (86/722) of children versus 38.4% (206/537) of older adults. Most adverse reactions were of mild intensity. Conclusion: Our findings support the need for greater availability and use of alternatives to systemic antimonials, particularly local therapies, and development of strategies to improve patient follow-up across the region, with special attention to pediatric populations. Author summary: Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) is a vector-borne disease caused by a parasite called Leishmania that affects more than 1 million people worldwide each year and mostly causes chronic skin ulcers. The first line treatment continues to be systemic antimonials, despite drawbacks such as numerous daily injections and toxic side effects. Some groups, including children and older adults, are usually not included in clinical trials and, therefore, specific treatment guidance for them is uncertain due to the scarcity of robust evidence. RedeLEISH, a Latin American network of leishmaniasis researchers, conducted a retrospective study of the medical records of children ≤ 10 years of age and adults ≥ 60 years of age, treated between 2014 and 2018 in ten CL referral centers in the region, with the aim of learning about and documenting the effectiveness and tolerability of routine antileishmanial treatments, and ultimately contributing to improving the management of these patient groups. Our findings, based on 1,325 eligible patients' records (589 adults ≥ 60 years of age and 736 children ≤ 10 years of age), showed that in both age groups the disease presents predominantly in a mild form, but that the most commonly used treatment, systemic antimonials, has limited effectiveness. This supports and encourages greater use of local therapies, and other treatment alternatives in these special populations. The results of this study also highlight the need to develop strategies for better follow-up of routine CL treatment and determination of effectiveness, as lack of such information was the principal criterion for exclusion of patients screened for eligibility, and less than 50% of eligible patients had information on two or more follow-up visits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mucosal Leishmaniasis (ML), a neglected tropical disease caused by Leishmania parasites, impairs the quality of life of under-resourced populations in South America. If not treated promptly, this disease progresses to facial deformities and death. The low sensitivity of microscopy results and the unavailability of other accurate tests hamper the diagnosis. As clinical criteria are readily available in any setting, these may be combined in a syndromic algorithm, which in turn can be used as a diagnostic tool. We explore potential clinical criteria for a syndromic diagnostic algorithm for ML in rural healthcare settings in South America. Methodology/Principal findings: The protocol for this systematic review was pre-registered in PROSPERO with the number: CRD42017074148. In patients with ML, described in case series identified through a systematic retrieval process, we explored the cumulative ML detection rates of clinical criteria. Participants: all patients with active mucosal disease from an endemic area in South America. Any original, non-treatment study was eligible, and case reports were excluded. PUBMED, EMBASE, Web of Science, SCIELO, and LILACS databases were searched without restrictions. The risk of bias was assessed with the JBI checklist for case series. We included 10 full texts describing 192 ML patients. Male gender had the highest detection rate (88%), followed by ulcer of the nasal mucosa (77%), age >15 (69%), and symptom duration >4 months (63%). Significance: Within this selection of patients, we found that the male gender, ulcer of the nasal mucosa, age >15, and symptom duration >4 months lead to the highest detection rates. However, higher detection comes -naturally- with a higher rate of false positives as well. As we only included ML patients, this could not be verified. Therefore, the criteria that we found to be most promising should be validated in a well-designed prospective study. Author summary: Mucosal leishmaniasis, a disease caused by Leishmania parasites, is transmitted from animals to humans by sandflies. It is a forgotten disease that affects under-resourced populations in South America. Without treatment, this disease mutilates the face and can even be fatal. Diagnosing mucosal leishmaniasis is challenging. The only available testing in rural areas is the use of either a lesion smear or biopsy for light microscopy, however, this is unreliable. Many patients suffer for years before receiving treatment. Syndromic algorithms use patient characteristics, such as age, gender, and symptoms to identify patients for treatment. This method has been promoted to manage infectious diseases, such as tuberculosis and sexually transmitted diseases, in low resource settings. We explore clinical criteria for a new algorithm to diagnose mucosal leishmaniasis in patients described in the medical literature. We searched the literature for reports written in any language and identified 10 studies describing 192 patients with mucosal leishmaniasis. We found that male gender, ulcer of the nasal mucosa, age >15, and symptom duration >4 months lead to acceptable detection rates. Therefore, diagnostic algorithms might improve the detection of patients with mucosal leishmaniasis but need prospective studies in clinical practice to prove their true potential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The role of the host immunity in determining leprosy clinical forms and complications is well recognized, implying that changes in the immune status may interfere with several aspects of the disease. Therefore, we hypothesized that the presence of viral co-infections and associated immunological changes will have a clinical impact on leprosy outcomes. The aim of our study was to determine the clinical impact of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), human T cell lymphotrophic virus type 1 (HTLV-1), hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) co-infection on the development of reactions, neuritis, neuropathy and relapses. Methodology/Principal Findings: Cohort study in 245 leprosy subjects from Bahia, Brazil. Patients were followed from the time of diagnosis until at least the end of multidrug therapy. Viral co-infection was detected in 36 out of the 245 patients (14.7%). Specific co-infection rates were 10.6% for HBV, 2.9% for HIV, 2.5% for HTLV-1 and 0.8% for HCV. All four groups of co-infected patients had higher rates of neuritis and nerve function impairment compared to non co-infected leprosy subjects. The relapse rate was also higher in the co-infected group (8.3%) versus patients without co-infection (1.9%); relative risk 4.37, 95% confidence interval 1.02–18.74. Conclusions/Significance: Leprosy patients should be screened for HBV, HCV, HIV and HTLV-1 co-infections. Besides contributing to better health care, this measure will facilitate the early detection of severe complications through targeting of higher risk patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]