Double-blind trial of the efficacy of pentoxifylline vs thalidomide for the treatment of type II reaction in leprosy

Type II reaction in leprosy, or erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL), is often characterized by severe clinical symptoms together with nerve function impairment leading to permanent disabilities. Thalidomide has been shown to be a highly effective drug for the treatment of ENL. It is, however, contraindicated for women of childbearing age due to its teratogenicity. On the other hand, pentoxifylline, used to treat hypercoagulable states, is not teratogenic and, like thalidomide, can inhibit the synthesis of tumor necrosis factor-a and other cytokines. In the present randomized double-blind clinical study we compared the effectiveness of orally administered pentoxifylline vs thalidomide in treating type II reaction in 44 patients. Daily doses of 300 mg thalidomide or 1.2 g pentoxifylline were administered for 30 days to multibacillary leprosy patients undergoing type II reaction. Randomly chosen patients were included in the study before, during, and after specific multidrug therapy. Clinical evaluations were performed on the 1st, 7th, 14th, 21st, and 30th days of treatment and laboratory tests were carried out on the 1st and 30th days. As expected, overall, thalidomide proved to be more effective in the treatment of type II leprosy reaction. Nevertheless, continuous treatment with pentoxifylline was effective in relieving the clinical signs of ENL, especially limb edema and systemic symptoms, in 62.5% of the patients

Interleukin-10-dependent down-regulation of interferon-gamma response to Leishmania by Mycobacterium leprae antigens during the clinical course of a coinfection

We have described a case of a patient with an intriguing association of mucocutaneous leishmaniasis with lepromatous leprosy, two opposite polar forms of these spectral diseases. In the present follow-up study, we investigated the effect of the addition of Mycobacterium leprae antigens on interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) production in Leishmania antigen-stimulated cultures of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) from this patient. For this purpose, PBMC cultures were stimulated with crude L. braziliensis and/or M. leprae whole-cell antigen extracts or with concanavalin A. In some experiments, neutralizing anti-human interleukin (IL)-10 antibodies were added to the cultures. IFN-γ and IL-10 levels in culture supernatants were measured by ELISA. During active leprosy, M. leprae antigens induced 72.3% suppression of the IFN-γ response to L. braziliensis antigen, and this suppression was abolished by IL-10 neutralization. Interestingly, the suppressive effect of M. leprae antigen was lost after the cure of leprosy and the disappearance of this effect was accompanied by exacerbation of mucosal leishmaniasis. Considered together, these results provide evidence that the concomitant lepromatous leprosy induced an IL-10-mediated regulatory response that controlled the immunopathology of mucosal leishmaniasis, demonstrating that, in the context of this coinfection, the specific immune response to one pathogen can influence the immune response to the other pathogen and the clinical course of the disease caused by it. Our findings may contribute to a better understanding of the Leishmania/M. leprae coinfection and of the immunopathogenesis of mucosal leishmaniasis