Performance of PGL-I,LID-1 and NDO-LID antigens for leprosy serological diagnosis in patients and household contacts: a review of the literature

• Autor(a) principal: Bovolini, Giovana M.
• Data de Publicação: 2019
• Outros Autores: Silva, Eliane A., Souza, Vânia Nieto Brito de
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Hansenologia Internationalis (Online)
• Texto Completo: https://periodicos.saude.sp.gov.br/hansenologia/article/view/36253
• topic: Hanseníase; Diagnóstico; Testes sorológicos; Leprosy; Diagnosis; Sorological tests

Leprosy affects skin and peripheral nerves bringing several disabilities in absence of specific treatment. So that, effective diagnostic tools are required for early therapeutic interventions. Detection of antibodies against phenolic glycolipid I (PGL-I) is widely employed in the diagnosis and clinical classification while the leprosy IDRI diagnostic (LID-1) protein was designed to improve the diagnosis of paucibacillary patients. More recently, this synthetic antigen was conjugated with the natural octyl disaccharide (NDO) of PGL-I, originating the NDO-LID in order to increase its sensitivity. Here, we evaluate 16 studies, comparing the performance of these three antigens (PGL-I, LID-1 and NDO-LID) for leprosy diagnosis and evaluation of the household contacts. We verified among the different studies high variation regarding to population involved, sample size, clinical classification of patients and methodology used, making difficult the comparison. Among multibacillary patients, anti-PGL-I positivity ranged from 54.0 to 96.0%, while for LID-1 it was between 47.4 to 94.8% and for NDO-LID presented levels from 60 to 98.9%. In paucibacillary patients, responsiveness ranged from 6.4 to 52.9% when PGL-I was used, 4.0 to 60% against LID-1 and 16.0 to 63.6% if NDO-LID was employed. For household contacts, the response anti-PGL-I, LID-1 and NDO-LID was 13.2%, 21.7% and 22.9%, respectively. NDO-LID antigen showed higher sensitivity in most studies reflecting its potential as tool for leprosy diagnosis, mainly of MB patients, however, the recognition of this antigen by healthy household contact reinforces the value of the clinical evaluation to leprosy diagnosis.