Genomic Surveillance of Recent Dengue Outbreaks in Colombo, Sri Lanka.

All four serotypes of the dengue virus (DENV1-4) cause a phenotypically similar illness, but serial infections from different serotypes increase the risk of severe disease. Thus, genomic surveillance of circulating viruses is important to detect serotype switches that precede community outbreaks of disproportionate magnitude. A phylogenetic analysis was conducted on near full length DENV genomes sequenced from serum collected from a prospective cohort study from the Colombo district, Sri Lanka during a 28-month period using Oxford nanopore technology, and the consensus sequences were analyzed using maximum likelihood and Bayesian evolutionary analysis. From 523 patients, 328 DENV sequences were successfully generated (DENV1: 43, DENV2: 219, DENV3:66). Most circulating sequences originated from a common ancestor that was estimated to have existed from around 2010 for DENV2 and around 2015/2016 for DENV1 and DENV3. Four distinct outbreaks coinciding with monsoon rain seasons were identified during the observation period mostly driven by DENV2 cosmopolitan genotype, except for a large outbreak in 2019 contributed by DENV3 genotype I. This serotype switch did not result in a more clinically severe illness. Phylogeographic analyses showed that all outbreaks started within Colombo city and then spread to the rest of the district. In 2019, DENV3 genotype I, previously, rarely reported in Sri Lanka, is likely to have contributed to a disease outbreak. However, this did not result in more severe disease in those infected, probably due to pre-existing DENV3 immunity in the community. Targeted vector control within Colombo city before anticipated seasonal outbreaks may help to limit the geographic spread of outbreaks.

Clinical and Public Health Implications of Human T-Lymphotropic Virus Type 1 Infection.

Human T-lymphotropic virus type 1 (HTLV-1) is estimated to affect 5 to 10 million people globally and can cause severe and potentially fatal disease, including adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATL) and HTLV-1-associated myelopathy/tropical spastic paraparesis (HAM/TSP). The burden of HTLV-1 infection appears to be geographically concentrated, with high prevalence in discrete regions and populations. While most high-income countries have introduced HTLV-1 screening of blood donations, few other public health measures have been implemented to prevent infection or its consequences. Recent advocacy from concerned researchers, clinicians, and community members has emphasized the potential for improved prevention and management of HTLV-1 infection. Despite all that has been learned in the 4 decades following the discovery of HTLV-1, gaps in knowledge across clinical and public health aspects persist, impeding optimal control and prevention, as well as the development of policies and guidelines. Awareness of HTLV-1 among health care providers, communities, and affected individuals remains limited, even in countries of endemicity. This review provides a comprehensive overview on HTLV-1 epidemiology and on clinical and public health and highlights key areas for further research and collaboration to advance the health of people with and at risk of HTLV-1 infection.

Leishmania RNA virus-1 is similarly detected among metastatic and non-metastatic phenotypes in a prospective cohort of American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis.

American Tegumentary Leishmaniasis (ATL) is an endemic and neglected disease of South America. Here, mucosal leishmaniasis (ML) disproportionately affects up to 20% of subjects with current or previous localised cutaneous leishmaniasis (LCL). Preclinical and clinical reports have implicated the Leishmania RNA virus-1 (LRV1) as a possible determinant of progression to ML and other severe manifestations such as extensive cutaneous and mucosal disease and treatment failure and relapse. However, these associations were not consistently found in other observational studies and are exclusively based on cross-sectional designs. In the present study, 56 subjects with confirmed ATL were assessed and followed out for 24-months post-treatment. Lesion biopsy specimens were processed for molecular detection and quantification of Leishmania parasites, species identification, and LRV1 detection. Among individuals presenting LRV1 positive lesions, 40% harboured metastatic phenotypes; comparatively 58.1% of patients with LRV1 negative lesions harboured metastatic phenotypes (p = 0.299). We found treatment failure (p = 0.575) and frequency of severe metastatic phenotypes (p = 0.667) to be similarly independent of the LRV1. Parasite loads did not differ according to the LRV1 status (p = 0.330), nor did Leishmanin skin induration size (p = 0.907) or histopathologic patterns (p = 0.780). This study did not find clinical, parasitological, or immunological evidence supporting the hypothesis that LRV1 is a significant determinant of the pathobiology of ATL.

Quantitative Kinetoplast DNA Assessment During Treatment of Mucosal Leishmaniasis as a Potential Biomarker of Outcome: A Pilot Study.

Mucosal leishmaniasis (ML) is a disfiguring manifestation of Leishmania (Viannia) infection. We evaluated parasite load (PL) over time as a potential biomarker of treatment outcome in ML. PL was assessed with kinetoplast DNA quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (kDNA-qPCR) at enrollment, days 14 and 21-28 of therapy and 3, 6, 12-18, and 18-24 months after treatment of ML and correlated to demographic, clinical, and parasitologic factors. Forty-four patients were enrolled: 30 men and 14 women. Enrollment PL differed significantly by causative species (P < 0.001), and was higher in patients with severe ML (nasal and laryngeal involvement) compared with those with only isolated nasal involvement (median = 1,285 versus 51.5 parasites/µg tissue DNA; P = 0.005). Two patterns of PL emerged: pattern 1 (N = 23) was characterized by a sequential decline in PL during and after therapy until kDNA was undetectable. Pattern 2 (N = 18) was characterized by clearance of detectable kDNA during treatment, followed by an increased PL thereafter. All patients who failed treatment (N = 4) demonstrated pattern 1. Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis was overrepresented among those with pattern 2 (P = 0.019). PL can be quantified by cytology brush qPCR during and after treatment in ML. We demonstrate that treatment failure was associated with undetectable PL, and L. (V.) braziliensis infection was overrepresented in those with rebounding PL.

Simultaneous infection with Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis and L. (V.) lainsoni in a Peruvian patient with cutaneous leishmaniasis.

Conventional understanding suggests that simultaneous infection with more than one species of Leishmania is unlikely. In Peru, co-infections are clinically relevant because causative species dictates prognosis, treatment response, and follow-up. We describe a case of Leishmania (Viannia) braziliensis and L. (V.) lainsoni co-infection in a Peruvian patient with cutaneous leishmaniasis.

Non-invasive cytology brush PCR for the diagnosis and causative species identification of American cutaneous leishmaniasis in Peru.

BACKGROUND: Traditional methods of detecting Leishmania from cutaneous lesions involve invasive diagnostic procedures, such as scrapings, which cause discomfort, require technical expertise, and carry risks of invasive procedures. We compared the performance of 2 novel, molecular-based non-invasive methods for the diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL). METHODS: Consecutive patients presenting to the Leishmania Clinic at the Hospital Nacional Cayetano Heredia were enrolled. PCR was performed on filter paper lesion impressions (FPLIs), cytology brushes, and lancets for detection of Leishmania DNA. Smears from lesion scrapings and leishmanin skin test were also performed. Outcome measures were sensitivity and specificity. Composite reference standard was any 2 of 5 tests positive. Species identification was performed by PCR assays of positive specimens. RESULTS: Ninety patients with 129 lesions were enrolled, 117 of which fulfilled reference criteria for a diagnosis of CL. Of these 117 lesions, 113 were positive by PCR of lancets used for lesion scrapings versus 116 by PCR of FPLIs (p=0.930) or 116 by PCR of cytology brushes (p=0.930). Sensitivity and specificity of PCR on lancets were 96.6% [95% CI 93.3-99.9%] and 100%, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of FPLI PCR were 99.1% [95% CI 97.4-100%] and 100%, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of cytology brush PCR were 99.1% [95% CI 97.4-100%] and 100%, respectively. Giemsa-stained lesion smear and leishmanin skin test had inferior sensitivities at 47.9% [95% CI 38.9-57.0%] and 82.3% [95% CI 73.9-90.7%], respectively, compared to PCR of invasive or non-invasive specimens (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cytology brush PCR constitutes a sensitive and specific alternative to traditional diagnostic assays performed on invasive specimens such as lesion scrapings. It performs comparatively to non-invasive FPLI PCR. This novel, rapid, and well-tolerated method has the potential for widespread use in the field and in pediatric populations where traditional specimen collection is difficult.

Non-invasive cytology brush PCR diagnostic testing in mucosal leishmaniasis: superior performance to conventional biopsy with histopathology.

BACKGROUND: Traditional methods of diagnosing mucosal leishmaniasis (ML), such as biopsy with histopathology, are insensitive and require collection of an invasive diagnostic specimen. METHODS: We compared standard invasive procedures including biopsy histopathology, biopsy PCR, and leishmanin skin test (LST) to a novel, non-invasive, cytology-brush based PCR for the diagnosis of ML in Lima, Peru. Consensus reference standard was 2/4 tests positive, and outcome measures were sensitivity and specificity. Leishmania species identification was performed by PCR-based assays of positive specimens. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were enrolled, 23 of whom fulfilled criteria for a diagnosis of ML. Sensitivity and specificity of biopsy with histopathology were 21.7% [95% CI 4.9-38.5%] and 100%; 69.6% [95% CI 50.8-88.4%] and 100% for LST; 95.7% [95% CI 87.4-100%] and 100% for biopsy PCR; and 95.7% [95% CI 87.4-100%] and 90% [95% CI 71.4-100%] for cytology brush PCR using both Cervisoft® and Histobrush® cervical cytology brushes. Represented species identified by PCR-RFLP included: L. (V). braziliensis (n = 4), and L. (V). peruviana (n = 3). CONCLUSIONS: Use of commercial grade cytology brush PCR for diagnosis of ML is sensitive, rapid, well tolerated, and carries none of the risks of invasive diagnostic procedures such as biopsy. Further optimization is required for adequate species identification. Further evaluation of this method in field and other settings is warranted.

Polymerase chain reaction detection of Leishmania kDNA from the urine of Peruvian patients with cutaneous and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis.

We hypothesized that Leishmania kDNA may be present in urine of patients with cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL). Urine samples and standard diagnostic specimens were collected from patients with skin lesions. kDNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed on samples from patients and 10 healthy volunteers from non-endemic areas. Eighty-six of 108 patients were diagnosed with CL and 18 (21%) had detectable Leishmania Viannia kDNA in the urine. Sensitivity and specificity were 20.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.3-29.5%) and 100%. Six of 8 patients with mucocutaneous involvement had detectable kDNA in urine versus 12 of 78 patients with isolated cutaneous disease (P < 0.001). L. (V.) braziliensis (N = 3), L. (V.) guyanensis (N = 6), and L. (V.) peruviana (N = 3) were identified from urine. No healthy volunteer or patient with an alternate diagnosis had detectable kDNA in urine. Sensitivity of urine PCR is sub-optimal for diagnosis. On the basis of these preliminary data in a small number of patients, detectable kDNA in urine may identify less localized forms of infection and inform treatment decisions.

Diagnostic performance of filter paper lesion impression PCR for secondarily infected ulcers and nonulcerative lesions caused by cutaneous leishmaniasis.

We compared traditional cutaneous leishmaniasis diagnostic methods to filter paper lesion impression (FPLI) PCR for secondarily infected ulcers and nonulcerative lesions. The sensitivity and specificity of FPLI PCR for secondarily infected lesions (n = 8) were 100%. In primarily nonulcerative lesions (n = 15), the sensitivity of FPLI PCR was inferior to that of pooled-invasive-specimen PCR (72.7% versus 100%) (P = 0.10). FPLI PCR is sensitive, specific, and unlike invasive procedures, can be used in secondarily infected ulcers. Invasive specimen collection is superior in nonulcerative lesions.

Detection and species identification of Leishmania DNA from filter paper lesion impressions for patients with American cutaneous leishmaniasis.

BACKGROUND: Traditional detection of Leishmania from ulcers involves collection of invasive specimens that cause discomfort, require technical expertise, and carry risks of invasive procedures. We compared traditional diagnostic methods with a molecular noninvasive filter paper-based method for the diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis. METHODS: Consecutive patients presenting to the Leishmania Clinic at Hospital Nacional Cayetano Heredia were enrolled. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed on lesion scrapings, aspirates, and filter paper impressions. The reference standard was any 2 of 5 tests positive: smear, aspirate culture, invasive-specimen PCR (scrapings and aspirates), filter paper PCR, and leishmanin skin test. Outcome measures were sensitivity and specificity. Leishmania speciation was performed by PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) of positive specimens. RESULTS: Forty-five patients with 66 lesions were enrolled. Of 52 lesions diagnosed as cutaneous leishmaniasis, 50 were positive by PCR of invasive specimens versus 48 by PCR of filter papers (P=.930). Sensitivity and specificity of PCR on invasively obtained specimens were 94.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.9%-100%) and 92.9% (95% CI, 79.4%-100%). Sensitivity and specificity of filter paper PCR were 92.3% (95% CI, 85.1%-99.5%) and 100%. Culture, smear, and leishmanin skin test all had inferior sensitivities, compared with PCR of invasive or noninvasive specimens (P<.001). Of 50 specimens positive by PCR, 19 had sufficient DNA for PCR-RFLP analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Filter paper PCR constitutes a sensitive and specific alternative to traditional diagnostic assays. This novel, rapid, well-tolerated method has the potential for widespread use in the field and in pediatric populations where traditional specimen collection is most difficult to perform, and can potentially be used for rapid species identification.