The Presence of Leishmania braziliensis DNA in the Nasal Mucosa of Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Patients and the Search for Possible Clinical and Immunological Patterns of Disease Progression: A Cross Sectional Study.

Leishmania braziliensis is the most important causal agent of American tegumentary leishmaniasis (ATL), and 3 to 5% of patients develop mucosal lesions. The mechanisms related to parasite and host immune interactions and the parasite life cycle that lead to dissemination to the mucosa are poorly understood. We aimed to detect L. braziliensis DNA in the nasal mucosa of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) patients with early mucous dissemination and to relate those findings to specific inflammatory responses. Nasal swabs were collected from patients with the cutaneous form of ATL. L. braziliensis DNA was investigated using TaqMan-based real-time PCR. The levels of serum cytokines (IL-12, IL-6, TNF-α, IL-10, IL-1ß and IL-8) were measured by a multiplex cytometric array. A Poisson regression model was used to test prevalence ratios (PRs) and multivariate interactions of clinical and laboratory characteristics. Of the 79 CL patients, 24 (30%) had L. braziliensis DNA in the nasal mucosa. In the multivariate model, parasite DNA presence in mucosa was associated with a reduction in IL-12 levels (PR = 0.440; p=0.034), increased IL-6 levels (PR = 1.001; p=0.002) and a higher number of affected body segments (PR = 1.65; p<0.001). In this study, we observed a higher rate of early dissemination to the nasal mucosa than what was previously described. We suggest that an enhanced Th1 profile characterized by higher IL-12 is important for preventing dissemination of L. braziliensis to the mucosa. Further evaluation of parasite-related interactions with the host immunological response is necessary to elucidate the dissemination mechanisms of Leishmania.

Successful treatment of diffuse cutaneous leishmaniasis caused by Leishmania amazonensis

Abstract Diffuse cutaneous leishmaniasis is a rare universal disease associated with an inadequate host cell immune response, caused by different species: infantum, aethiopica, major, mexicana, and others, which presents the challenge of a poor therapeutic response. In Brazil, it is caused by L. amazonensis. A case confirmed by histopathology with an abundance of vacuolated macrophages full of amastigotes and lymphocyte scarcity, identified by RFLP-ITS1PCR and in vitro decrease and exhaustion of the host cell immune response to L. amazonensis antigen, was treated early (3 months after the onset) with Glucantime (2 months) and allopurinol (29 months) with clinical cure, after a follow-up for 30 months after treatment.

A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial: Oral Miltefosine and Pentavalent Antimonials Associated With Pentoxifylline for the Treatment of American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis.

Introduction: American tegumentary leishmaniasis (ATL), which can present as either cutaneous (CL) or mucosal leishmaniasis (ML), is endemic in South America, and first-line antimonial treatments are known for their wide range of adverse effects (AEs). Growing reports of drug resistance increase the urgency of the need for better treatment options. The objective of this pilot clinical trial was to assess the efficacy of and AEs associated with the oral combination of miltefosine and pentoxifylline based on a post hoc analysis. Methods: A pilot, randomized, open-label clinical trial was performed. The experimental group (M+P) received 50 mg twice a day (BID) miltefosine and 400 mg three times a day (TID) pentoxifylline, and the control group (A+P) received 20 mg Sb+V/kg/day intravenously and 400 mg TID pentoxifylline. Patients with ML received treatment for 28 days, and patients with CL received treatment for 20 days. Results: Forty-three patients were included: 25 with ML and 18 with CL caused by L.(V.) braziliensis. AEs were more frequent in the A+P group (p=0.322), and there was a need for treatment interruption due to severe AEs (p=0.027). Patients with CL had a higher chance of achieving a cure (p=0.042) and a higher risk of AEs (p=0.033). There was no difference in the chance of a cure based on the treatment (p=0.058). Conclusion: In this pilot randomized clinical trial, M+P treatment and A+P treatment yielded similar cure rates, and the former was associated with a lower risk of AEs. Future studies with more patients and longer follow-up are recommended.

Successful treatment of diffuse cutaneous leishmaniasis caused by Leishmania amazonensis.

Diffuse cutaneous leishmaniasis is a rare universal disease associated with an inadequate host cell immune response, caused by different species: infantum, aethiopica, major, mexicana, and others, which presents the challenge of a poor therapeutic response. In Brazil, it is caused by L. amazonensis. A case confirmed by histopathology with an abundance of vacuolated macrophages full of amastigotes and lymphocyte scarcity, identified by RFLP-ITS1PCR and in vitro decrease and exhaustion of the host cell immune response to L. amazonensis antigen, was treated early (3 months after the onset) with Glucantime (2 months) and allopurinol (29 months) with clinical cure, after a follow-up for 30 months after treatment.

A retrospective cohort study of the effectiveness and adverse events of intralesional pentavalent antimonials in the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis.

INTRODUCTION: The standard therapy for American cutaneous leishmaniasis (ACL) is intravenous meglumine antimoniate (IV-MA). However, treatment interruptions due to adverse events (AEs) and non-adherence are frequent. Consequently, intralesional MA (IL-MA) was proposed. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effectiveness of and AEs associated with IL-MA. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 240 patients with ACL. We excluded patients with mucous lesions and disseminated leishmaniasis and those who received treatment in the previous 6 months. We considered protocol treatments as the main risk factors. IL-MA was performed using a subcutaneous injection of MA in a volume sufficient to elevate the lesion base (approximately 1 mL/cm2 of lesion area) once weekly for 1-8 weeks. IV-MA was performed via intravenous injections of MA at a dosage of 10-20 mg Sb5+/kg/day for 20 days. The primary outcome was defined as a lesion cure 3 months after treatment, and AEs were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients were included. The IL-MA group consisted of 21 patients, and the IV-MA group consisted of 52 patients. The IL-MA group was older, had more comorbidities and more previous unsuccessful treatment of ACL. The antimonial dose was significantly lower in this group. The cure rate for IL-MA was 66.7%, which was lower than that in the IV-MA group (relative risk (RR) = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.50-0.92, p < 0.001), while the rate of AEs was similar. Female sex (RR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.02-1.33), lesion diameter ≤1 cm (RR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.00-1.56) and treatment with IV-MA (RR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.06-1.93) were independently associated with achieving a cure. Comorbidities (RR = 1.7, 95% CI: 1.06-2.98) were independently associated with AEs. CONCLUSIONS: Patients of IL-MA group were older, had more comorbidities and more previous unsuccessful treatment of ACL. Nevertheless, IL-MA had a cure rate of 66.7%, and it was useful in this context. A prospective randomized trial is recommended.

A comprehensive systematic review of leishmaniasis in patients undergoing drug-induced immunosuppression for the treatment of dermatological, rheumatological and gastroenterological diseases.

Immunosuppression is an important risk factor for leishmaniasis. We assessed the clinical profile, geographic distribution and prevalence of leishmaniasis in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy for dermatological, rheumatological or gastroenterological autoimmune diseases. We identified relevant studies in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and LILACS on July 3rd, 2018. We included articles that reported at least one case of leishmaniasis in patients undergoing immunosuppressive treatment for dermatological, rheumatological or gastroenterological diseases. Our protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018103050). We assessed the quality of the included studies with the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool. After the removal of duplicates, 5,431 articles were collected and screened. We included 138 articles; the prevalence of leishmaniasis in six methodologically similar studies varied from three to 1,282 cases per 100,000 patients using anti-TNFα drugs, but the results were significantly heterogeneous . Leishmaniasis in patients treated with immunosuppressive drugs is a health problem mostly reported in European countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea; sporadic activities, such as travelling, seem not to be associated with a significant risk of leishmaniasis, although effective control measures must always be observed.

A randomized, open-label clinical trial comparing the long-term effects of miltefosine and meglumine antimoniate for mucosal leishmaniasis.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of mucosal leishmaniasis (ML) is difficult due to the toxicity and route of administration of standard drugs. Miltefosine is an oral agent used for leishmaniasis treatment; however, no data exist regarding its use for ML in Brazil. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of miltefosine for ML treatment compared to that of pentavalent antimonial in a pilot study. METHODS: We performed a randomized clinical trial with two parallel groups. The tested intervention consisted of miltefosine 1.3-2 mg/kg/day (two capsules) for 28 days or intravenous 20 mg SbV/kg/day of meglumine antimoniate (N-MA) for 30 days. The final endpoint was defined as complete healing of the lesion four years after treatment. We also analyzed an early endpoint at 90 days after treatment. RESULTS: Forty patients were included in this study: each experimental group comprised 20 patients. Applying a multivariate model in an intention-to-treat analysis, we observed that patients treated with miltefosine had a cure probability 2.08 times greater (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03-4.18) than those treated with N-MA at 90 days after treatment. At the final endpoint, we observed no differences in cure probability between miltefosine and N-MA (relative risk = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.33-1.32). With respect to adverse reactions, significant differences between groups were related to gastrointestinal effects, which were more frequent in the miltefosine group. CONCLUSIONS: Miltefosine may be an interesting alternative for treating ML because of its oral administration and cure rate after long-term follow-up.

A randomized, open-label clinical trial comparing the long-term effects of miltefosine and meglumine antimoniate for mucosal leishmaniasis

Abstract INTRODUCTION: The treatment of mucosal leishmaniasis (ML) is difficult due to the toxicity and route of administration of standard drugs. Miltefosine is an oral agent used for leishmaniasis treatment; however, no data exist regarding its use for ML in Brazil. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of miltefosine for ML treatment compared to that of pentavalent antimonial in a pilot study. METHODS: We performed a randomized clinical trial with two parallel groups. The tested intervention consisted of miltefosine 1.3-2 mg/kg/day (two capsules) for 28 days or intravenous 20 mg SbV/kg/day of meglumine antimoniate (N-MA) for 30 days. The final endpoint was defined as complete healing of the lesion four years after treatment. We also analyzed an early endpoint at 90 days after treatment. RESULTS: Forty patients were included in this study: each experimental group comprised 20 patients. Applying a multivariate model in an intention-to-treat analysis, we observed that patients treated with miltefosine had a cure probability 2.08 times greater (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03-4.18) than those treated with N-MA at 90 days after treatment. At the final endpoint, we observed no differences in cure probability between miltefosine and N-MA (relative risk = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.33-1.32). With respect to adverse reactions, significant differences between groups were related to gastrointestinal effects, which were more frequent in the miltefosine group. CONCLUSIONS: Miltefosine may be an interesting alternative for treating ML because of its oral administration and cure rate after long-term follow-up.

American cutaneous leishmaniasis triggered by electrocoagulation.

Cutaneous leishmaniasis is usually transmitted by infected phlebotomine sand fly bites that initiate local cutaneous lesions. Few reports in the literature describe other modes of transmission. We report a case of a previously healthy 59-year-old woman who underwent electrocoagulation to remove seborrheic keratosis confirmed by dermatoscopy. Three months later, a skin fragment tested positive for Leishmania culture; the parasite was identified as L. (V.) braziliensis. Trauma may generate inflammatory cascades that favor Leishmania growth and lesion formation in previously infected patients. American cutaneous leishmaniasis is a dynamic disease with unclear pathophysiology because of continually changing environments, demographics, and human behaviors.

American cutaneous leishmaniasis triggered by electrocoagulation

Abstract Cutaneous leishmaniasis is usually transmitted by infected phlebotomine sand fly bites that initiate local cutaneous lesions. Few reports in the literature describe other modes of transmission. We report a case of a previously healthy 59-year-old woman who underwent electrocoagulation to remove seborrheic keratosis confirmed by dermatoscopy. Three months later, a skin fragment tested positive for Leishmania culture; the parasite was identified as L. (V.) braziliensis. Trauma may generate inflammatory cascades that favor Leishmania growth and lesion formation in previously infected patients. American cutaneous leishmaniasis is a dynamic disease with unclear pathophysiology because of continually changing environments, demographics, and human behaviors.