Interventions for erythema nodosum leprosum:A Cochrane review

Introduction: Treatment for erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL), an immunological complication of leprosy, is diverse. We undertook a systematic review as it was not clear which treatments were most beneficial. Methods: We did a systematic search to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing treatment with placebo, no treatment or another therapy. Two authors assessed quality and checked data. Results: We included 13 studies involving 445 participants. These trials assessed: betamethasone, thalidomide, pentoxifylline, clofazimine, indomethacin and levamisole. The quality of the trials was generally poor and no results could be pooled due to the treatments being so heterogeneous. Treatment with thalidomide showed a significant benefit compared to aspirin (RR 2.43; 95% CI 1.28 to 4.59). Clofazimine treatment was superior to prednisolone (more treatment successes; RR 3.67; 95% CI 1.36 to 9.91) and thalidomide (fewer recurrences; RR 0.08; 95% CI 0.01, 0.56). Minor adverse events were significantly lower in participants on a low dose thalidomide regimen compared to a high dose thalidomide regimen (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.93). Significantly more minor adverse events were reported in participants taking clofazimine compared with prednisolone (RR 1.92; 95% CI 1.10 to 3.35). None of the studies assessed quality of life or economic outcomes. Conclusion: There is some evidence of benefit for thalidomide and clofazimine, but generally we did not find clear benefits for interventions in the management of ENL.</p

Interventions for erythema nodosum leprosum:A Cochrane review

Introduction: Treatment for erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL), an immunological complication of leprosy, is diverse. We undertook a systematic review as it was not clear which treatments were most beneficial. Methods: We did a systematic search to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing treatment with placebo, no treatment or another therapy. Two authors assessed quality and checked data. Results: We included 13 studies involving 445 participants. These trials assessed: betamethasone, thalidomide, pentoxifylline, clofazimine, indomethacin and levamisole. The quality of the trials was generally poor and no results could be pooled due to the treatments being so heterogeneous. Treatment with thalidomide showed a significant benefit compared to aspirin (RR 2.43; 95% CI 1.28 to 4.59). Clofazimine treatment was superior to prednisolone (more treatment successes; RR 3.67; 95% CI 1.36 to 9.91) and thalidomide (fewer recurrences; RR 0.08; 95% CI 0.01, 0.56). Minor adverse events were significantly lower in participants on a low dose thalidomide regimen compared to a high dose thalidomide regimen (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.93). Significantly more minor adverse events were reported in participants taking clofazimine compared with prednisolone (RR 1.92; 95% CI 1.10 to 3.35). None of the studies assessed quality of life or economic outcomes. Conclusion: There is some evidence of benefit for thalidomide and clofazimine, but generally we did not find clear benefits for interventions in the management of ENL.</p

Editorial. Collaborative programmes of research in leprosy: the INFIR programme

Recent trends in medical research are, for a smaller number of large research programmes, developed to address the big questions rather than for large numbers of small projects. This is a trend encouraged by research funding bodies and the research community. This trend requires more collaboration between research groups and international cooperation, as well as increased inter disciplinary working. This has also promoted greater standardisation of methods to produce comparable results as well as encouraging the use of common technical terms to facilitate working across disciplines. Recent examples of this trend in leprosy research are the TRIPOD trials,1 the Participation Scale programme,2 the SALSA programme,3 IDEAL4 and the INFIR programme. This paper presents an overview of the INFIR programme to illustrate a collaborative programme of research in leprosy describing the background, funding, implementation and output

Leprosy type 1 reactions and erythema nodosum leprosum

Leprosy reactions are a major cause of nerve damage and morbidity in a significant proportion of leprosy patients. Reactions are immunologically mediated and can occur even after successful completion of multi-drug therapy. This review focuses on the epidemiology, pathology and treatment of leprosy type 1 reactions, erythema nodosum leprosum and silent neuropathy

Letter to the editor. A scale to assess the severity of leprosy reactions

Recognising and assessing the clinical signs and severity of leprosy reactions is essential for diagnosis and treatment. To promote such awareness there is a potential role for a severity scale that would draw attention to the early signs of leprosy reactions, the choice of treatment and to changes in response to treatment. Early work by Naafs &amp; van Droogenbroeck produced a composite measure called the ‘indice ne´vritique’ (neural index), which used various measures, including motor nerve conduction, an early type of monofilament sensory testing, voluntary muscle testing and nerve enlargement.1,2 Despite them demonstrating the utility of this measure, it was not used, possibly because it included neurophysiological measures, which are frequently not available in centres managing leprosy patients. Unpublished work by Alison Anderson and others at Green Pastures Hospital &amp; Rehabilitation Centre in Pokhara, Nepal, explored the potential of another scale to measure reaction severity. The use of a scale has been reported elsewhere in Nepal

Leprosy occurring as immune reconstitution syndrome.

Immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS) may occur in HIV-infected patients after starting highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). Since 2003, 19 cases were published as IRIS. Leprosy has been reported as an example of an IRIS, and it is important that this syndrome should be recognized in leprosy-endemic areas. The case definition of leprosy as IRIS is based on clinical presentation of leprosy, evidence of immune restoration and timing of onset. Case definition should include the following: (1) leprosy and/or leprosy type 1 reaction presenting within six months of starting HAART; (2) advanced HIV infection; (3) low CD4+ count before start HAART; (4) CD4+ count increasing after HAART has been started. Although pathogenic mechanisms are still unclear, it is likely that leprosy-associated IRIS will be increasingly reported in those countries endemic for both diseases and as access to HAART becomes more widely available