Serological responses to prednisolone treatment in leprosy reactions: study of TNF-α, antibodies to phenolic glycolipid-1, lipoarabinomanan, ceramide and S100-B
© Raju et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014
Received: 9 June 2014
Accepted: 18 July 2014
Published: 28 July 2014
Corticosteroids have been extensively used in the treatment of immunological reactions and neuritis in leprosy. The present study evaluates the serological response to steroid treatment in leprosy reactions and neuritis.
Seven serological markers [TNF-α, antibodies to Phenolic glycolipid-1 (PGL-1 IgM and IgG), Lipoarabinomannan (LAM IgG1 and IgG3), C2-Ceramide and S100 B] were analyzed longitudinally in 72 leprosy patients before, during and after the reaction. At the onset of reaction these patients received a standard course of prednisolone. The levels of the above markers were measured by Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and compared with the individuals own value in the month prior to the reaction and presented as percentage increase.
One month before the reaction individuals showed a varying increase in the level of different markers such as TNF-α (53%) and antibodies to Ceramide (53%), followed by to PGL-1 (51%), S100B (50%) and LAM (26%). The increase was significantly associated with clinical finding of nerve pain, tenderness and new nerve function impairment. After one month prednisolone therapy, there was a fall in the levels [TNF-α (60%), C2-Ceramide (54%), S100B (67%), PGL-1(47%) and LAM (52%)] with each marker responding differently to steroid.
Reactions in leprosy are inflammatory processes wherein a rise in set of serological markers can be detected a month before the clinical onset of reaction, some of which remain elevated during their action and steroid treatment induces a variable fall in the levels, and this forms the basis for a variable individual response to steroid therapy.
Leprosy is a chronic infectious disease caused by the bacteria Mycobacterium leprae. The clinical course of leprosy is often interrupted by acute episodes of immunological reactions (Type 1 and Type 2 reactions) that trigger inflammatory processes. Reactions often cause damage to peripheral nerves . Corticosteroids, mainly Prednisolone continues to be the mainstay in the management of reactions and nerve damage in leprosy . The mechanism of action of corticosteroids is primarily through the suppression of pro-inflammatory cytokines including tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) . Clinical response to steroids is variable [5–7] with only 50 to 80% showing a significant clinical improvement in nerve function. Lockwood et al. have measured TNF-α, interferon gamma (IFN-γ), and interleukin-2 (IL-2) levels in tissues and cells of patients with reversal reaction treated with steroids and found that there was a significant reduction in cytokine levels including TNF-α in most of the patients except a few who continued to maintain elevated levels even after 28 days of treatment [8, 9].
A longitudinal study of nerve function impairment in reaction (INFIR study) was carried out in a cohort of leprosy patients to identify potential early markers for reactions and nerve function impairment (NFI) . The markers evaluated were Tumor necrosis alpha (TNF-α), antibodies to mycobacterial Phenolic glycolipid −1 (PGL-1) and Lipoarabinomannan (LAM) and antibodies to cell surface component Ceramide and cytosolic and membrane component S100-B and the dynamics of these markers studied as they have been implicated in the pathogenesis of reactions and nerve damage. Cross sectional analysis carried out on these plasma markers at the time of diagnosis did not show any significant differences in the group of patients with or without reaction [10, 11] and hence we designed a novel analysis based on individualistic responses of plasma markers to steroid therapy. The response of these markers to steroid therapy over time was investigated. The present study was carried out in 72 MB patients of this cohort who developed reaction and the samples were analyzed before, during and after the reactional event. The markers were compared with individuals own ‘pre-reaction time’ and ‘post reaction time’ levels and each of the patients were treated with standardized steroid therapy . Inter individual differences in immunological responses is common observation. However, our hypothesis is that individual show variable response to serological markers during steroid treatment. Additionally, we found that there were no reports on the in vitro effect of steroids on TNF-α production in short term cell culture in leprosy patients and therefore carried out an in vitro study.
In the present study we have evaluated seven serological markers concomitantly before, during and after the reactions in patients treated with steroids.
Materials and methods
Permission for the INFIR (ILEP Nerve Function Impairment in Reactions) cohort study was obtained from the Indian Council of Medical Research and ethical approval was given by the Research Ethics Committee of the Central JALMA Institute for Leprosy in Agra. Informed consent was obtained from all patients at each center where subjects were recruited.
The INFIR cohort comprised of 303 newly registered patients at The Leprosy Mission (TLM) hospitals in Naini and Faizabad, in Uttar Pradesh, India. These patients were followed up for 2 years and serum samples were collected every month in the first year and alternately in the second year. For the present study 72 patients in reactions were selected out of which borderline tuberculoid (BT) were 45 (with bacillary index (BI) 0 to1), borderline lepromatous (BL) were 22 and lepromatous leprosy (LL) were 5 (with BI 1 to 5). All patients were put on WHO multidrug therapy (MDT). A detailed description of the study design has already been published [11, 12]. Patients who were clinically diagnosed with Type I and/or nerve function impairment (NFI) were treated with prednisolone according to the standard protocol [12–14] for reactions and neuritis (daily dosage not exceeding 1 mg/kg body weight for 3–6 months). The patients who presented with reactions or recent NFI at recruitment were excluded from the present analysis. A group of 72 patients were identified who developed a reaction (considered an event) and NFI during the course of follow up and formed the focus of this analysis. A separate data sheet was prepared which enabled us to concomitantly evaluate all the plasma markers.
Antibodies to PGL-1 (IgM & IgG), LAM (IgG1 & IgG3), Ceramide, S100 and cytokine TNF-α were measured by ELISA. Antigens were to be tested were originally dissolved in suitable solvent like de-ionized water (S-100 and PGL-1), or 70% methanol in PBS (ManLAM) or chloroform: methanol (3:1) and further dilution was carried out in absolute alcohol (0.5 mg/ml) in PBS (ceramide). ELISAs were carried out in 96 well plates (Immulon & Dynatech) coated with the antigen at a concentration of 0.1 mg/well in 0.05 M carbonate-bicarbonate buffer pH 9.6 by incubating overnight at 37°C (for S-100, PGL-I and LAM). For anti-ceramide, the antigen was further diluted in absolute alcohol then suspended in PBS and sonicated immediately prior to coating to obtain uniform suspension. Optical density (OD) of all the markers was measured at 450 nm. The details of ELISA and methodology have been presented in an earlier publication .
Additionally, TNF-α production in cultured lymphocytes was measured in treated leprosy patients (n = 13) and healthy subjects (n = 11).
PBMC cell culture
Peripheral blood mononuclear cultures were set up with isolated lymphocytes from leprosy [15, 16]. In brief, 5 ml of heparinized venous blood was collected from 13 treated leprosy patients and 11 healthy subjects. Equal numbers of cells of each sample were taken for the stimulation assay. 2 × 106 cells/well were used for culture . Stimulation of cells was carried out by phytohemagglutinin [(PHA) (5 μg/ml)], Concanavalin A [(Con A) (10 μg/ml)] and methyl prednisolone (5 μg/ml) [(Sigma, St. Louis, USA; Pharmacia and Upjohn company, Michigan, USA)]. Cultures were incubated at 37°C in a 5% CO2 incubator. Cells were cultured for 24 hr and the supernatant was stored at −70°C until the TNF-α ELISA (R & D Systems, UK) was carried out. TNF-αlevel in un-stimulated, PHA and Con A and methyl prednisolone treated cells were arbitrarily taken as 100% in both leprosy and healthy subjects.
The results of ELSIA & in vitro levels of TNF-α were expressed as percentages and mean ± SD respectively and the data were analyzed statistically by the ANOVA one-way analysis of variance (F) using GraphPad Prism version 5.
Serological markers during the follow up
Individuals expressed high or low levels of serological markers during the 2 year follow up. Figure 1a-g shows individuals representing high and low levels of each marker TNF-α, antibodies to Ceramide, S100, PGL-1(IgM & IgG) and LAM (IgG1 & IgG3). Variable periodicity of peak occurrence of serological markers could be observed in individuals.
Percentage change in levels of serological markers before, during and after reaction
Individuals showing increase and decrease of serological markers before & after reaction
Serological markers (n = 72)
Before the event increase
After the event decrease
Range of inhibition (%)
6.4 to 99.5
1.7 to 100
6.1 to 89
5.3 to 86
22.2 to 96.6
5.3 to 100
9.4 to 99
Serological markers and their association with nerve pain, tenderness and NFI
No of serological markers
% increase in serological markers before reaction (n = 72)
% decrease in serological markers after reaction (n = 72)
During the reaction percentage increase
New Nerve Function Impairment (NFI)
When the same analysis was done on the subjects a month after the reaction with any single test only 4.2% showed a decrease; however any of two or more tests in combination showed a decrease of 93.4%. Maximum inhibition was observed in S100 antibody (67%) followed by TNF-α (60%). The range of inhibition for each of the seven serological markers varied from individual to individual (Table 1).
Association of serological marker levels at time of reaction with nerve damage
Of the patients, 53.2% showed an increase of any three or four serological markers before the reaction showed clinically either individually or in combination an increase of nerve pain, nerve tenderness and new NFI at the time of reaction (Table 2).
In-vitro effect of methylprednisolone on TNF-α release
In vitro TNF-α levels in stimulated peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC)
Healthy subjects (n = 11)
Leprosy patients (n = 13)
0.23 ± 0.11
0.09 ± 0.05
PHA + conA
0.81 ± 0.66
1.08 ± 0.56
Methyl prednisolone (DC)
0.42 ± 0.46
0.22 ± 0.08
It is estimated that 2.1 million people around the world have deformities due to leprosy. Reactions and nerve damage in leprosy require prompt and adequate treatment with steroids/anti-inflammatory drugs failing which permanent deformities result [18, 19]. Each of the markers mentioned earlier have been found to play a role in the pathogenesis of reactions and nerve damage in leprosy by other groups [10, 19, 20]. However each of these have not been studied individually and together in a single individual with values before, during and after a reaction.
We hypothesized that individuals respond differentially to steroids and that is reflected in increase or decrease of the levels of these serological markers and this variability is associated with reactions and nerve damage.
The follow up data of patients with leprosy reactions showed (Figure 1a to g) spikes at periodic intervals suggesting simmering inflammation in leprosy. The periodic increase and decrease in the markers could be due to the release of processed mycobacterial antigen into the immunological milieu and the concomitant rise of inflammatory markers. Similar phenomenon was observed in other progressive neurodegenerative diseases such as Multiple Sclerosis .
Of the individuals, 47% showed an increase in the level of markers when compared to their own individual existing level before the reaction. This is a unique analysis comparing the individual’s level of each molecule to their existing level prior and after reaction. The individual variability in the level of expression of markers were normalized and presented as percentage increase or decrease. This finding established that leprosy patients show a variable increase of different markers before reaction. Our analysis showed two or four serological markers when tested in combination showed about 70% sensitivity to detect reaction. The maximum fold increase was observed in Ceramide antibody followed by TNF-α, followed by S100 antibody and PGL-1 (Table 1 and Figure 2) suggesting the combination of these four serological markers could be a choice to understand reaction and their relationship to nerve damage. In addition, to the above mentioned four serological markers other inflammatory and autoimmune markers which have a fold increase such as Interferon-inducible protein-10 (IP-10)  and Myelin P0 [23–25] should be explored for understanding the nerve damage.
As shown in Table 1 nerve pain, tenderness, new NFI was considered at the time of reaction and were correlated with increase in any of the serological markers individually or in combination. When all seven markers showed an increase during reaction it was associated with new nerve function impairment. The markers were not significantly different a month after the reaction. The major limitation or constraint in leprosy studies is defining the onset of infection and the exact time point of reaction and nerve damage which creates a difficulty in the enrollment of homogenous patient group. Further studies would help in understanding the association between clinical symptoms (nerve pain, nerve tenderness and new NFI) and serological markers during progression of nerve damage.
We studied the steroid response after the reaction and our analysis showed a cumulative decrease in the levels of the markers about 65.4% (when four serological markers were tested at a time). The maximum decrease was observed in antibodies to S100, TNF-α and antibodies to Ceramide & LAM (Table 1). A study on steroids treatment of reaction and changes in the inflammatory cytokines showed that TNF-αand other cytokines continue to be produced for a considerable time during and after the reaction  suggesting that a sustained inhibition of the inflammatory process is warranted in the management of reactions. As clinical reactions are known to precede nerve damage, inhibition of S100 antibody and TNF-α in reaction could be a molecular mechanism by which reactions are controlled, thus facilitating a quick recovery of nerve function in leprosy.
Steroids have been the mainstay of treatment of reactions and prevention of nerve impairment. Even though the number of samples assayed by in vitro were small, PBMC when stimulated with PHA/Con A showed a significant increase in TNF-αproduction in patients as compared to healthy subjects (Table 3). Inhibition of TNF-α by steroid (DC) was 65.3% by in vitro as compared to 60% in vivo (Table 1) suggesting partial response in leprosy reactions. The present study has shown that steroids do not produce a consistent and/or sustained suppression of all the markers associated with reaction and nerve damage. There is a need for alternate drug combinations to manage reaction and prevent nerve damage. Azathioprine and thalidomide are now being used as substitutes for steroids [26–28]. Considering the serological & in vitro results this study recommends a combination of steroids and other drugs that can effectively prevent leprosy nerve damage.
In conclusion, this study helps in understanding the responses of a leprosy individual in reaction to steroids in vivo and in vitro. There is a heterogeneity in the immunological responses to steroids and suggest that the future therapies should be multi component and individually tailored. Inhibition of autoantibodies with steroids could be a significant mechanism in preventing nerve damage. An increase in the serological markers before a reaction had an association with clinical symptoms and signs of nerve pain, tenderness, and new NFI and thus needs to be considered in the management of nerve damage. Identification of steroid responders and non-responders by an in vitro test could benefit the physician in better management of reactions and nerve damage.
Future studies on protein microarray would provide a comprehensive evaluation of other inflammatory and regulatory markers that are involved in leprosy reaction and that are down regulated in response of prednisolone therapy. Furthermore it would be interesting to study whether similar immunological and molecular mechanisms occur in Type II reactions of leprosy and the role of steroids treatment in nerve damage.
INFIR project was financially supported by Follereau Luxembourg, LEPRA UK and The Leprosy Mission International. We acknowledge the support of Novotel Accor and ACET UK for the research support for CODEWEL Nireekshana. Karuna D. Sagili was INFIR project technician and we acknowledge her contribution.
- Hastings RC, Convit J: Leprosy-Medicine in the Tropics Series. 1985, Edinburgh, New York: Churchill Livingstone,Google Scholar
- Rodrigues LC, Lockwood DNJ: Leprosy now: epidemiology, progress, challenges, and research gaps. Lancet Infect Dis. 2011, 11: 464-470. 10.1016/S1473-3099(11)70006-8View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kiran KU, Stanley JN, Pearson JM: The outpatient treatment of nerve damage in patients with borderline leprosy using a semi-standardized steroid regimen. Lepr Rev. 1985, 56: 127-134.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Elenkov IJ: Glucocorticoids and the Th1/Th2 balance. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004, 1024: 138-146. 10.1196/annals.1321.010View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Roche PW, Theuvenet WJ, Britton WJ: Risk factors for type-1 reactions in borderline leprosy patients. Lancet. 1991, 338: 654-657. 10.1016/0140-6736(91)91232-JView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lockwood DN, Vinayakumar S, Stanley JN, McAdam KP, Colston MJ: Clinical features and outcome of reversal (type 1) reactions in Hyderabad, India. Int J Lepr Other Mycobact Dis. 1993, 61: 8-15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Croft RP, Nicholls PG, Richards JH, Smith WCS: The treatment of acute nerve functions impairment in leprosy: result from a prospective Cohort study in Bangladesh. Lep Rev. 2000, 71: 154-168.Google Scholar
- Little D, Khanolkar-Young S, Coulthart A, Suneetha S, Lockwood DN: Immunohistochemical analysis of cellular infiltrate and gamma interferon, interleukin- 12 & inducible nitric oxide synthase expression in leprosy Type 1 (reversal) reactions before and during prednisolone treatment. Infect Immun. 2001, 69: 3413-3417. 10.1128/IAI.69.5.3413-3417.2001PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lockwood DN: Steroids in type 1 reaction: mechanism of action and effectiveness. Lepr Rev. 2000, 71: s111-s114.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Jadhav R, Suneetha L, Kamble R, Shinde V, Devi K, Chaduvula MV, Raju R, Suneetha S, Nicholls PG, Van Brakel WH, Lockwood DN: Analysis of antibody and cytokine markers for leprosy nerve damage and reactions in the INFIR cohort in India. PLOS Neg Trop Dis. 2011, 5 (3): e977-10.1371/journal.pntd.0000977.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Van Brakel W, Nicholls PG, Das L, Barkataki P, Suneetha SK, Jadhav S, Maddali P, Lockwood DN, Wilder-Smith E, Desikan KV: The INFIR Cohort Study: investigating prediction, detection and pathogenesis of neuropathy and reactions in leprosy. Methods and baseline results of a cohort of multibacillary leprosy patients in North India. Lepr Rev. 2005, 76: 14-34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Van Brakel W, Nicholls PG, Das L, Barkataki P, Maddali P, Lockwood DN, Wilder-Smith E: The INFIR Cohort Study: assessment of sensory and motor neuropathy in leprosy at baseline. Lepr Rev. 2005, 76: 277-295.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- World Health Organization: WHO Expert Committee on Leprosy. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 1998, 874: 22-23.Google Scholar
- Lockwood DN, Nicholls P, Smith WCS, Das L, Barkataki P, Van Brakel W, Suneetha S: Comparing the clinical and histological diagnosis of leprosy and leprosy reactions in the INFIR cohort of Indian patients with multibacillary leprosy. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012, 6 (6): e1702- 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001702PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Boyum A: Isolation of mononuclear cells and granulocytes from human blood. Scand J Clin Ab Invest. 1968, 21: 77-89. 10.3109/00365516809076979.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Thurm CW, Halsey JF: Measurement of Cytokine Production Using Whole Blood, Unit 7 18B. Current Protocols in Immunology. 2005, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc,Google Scholar
- Andersson AK, Chaduvula M, Atkinson SE, Khanolkar-Young S, Jain S, Suneetha L, Suneetha S, Lockwood DN: Effects of prednisolone treatment on cytokine expression in patients with leprosy Type 1 reactions. Infect Immun. 2005, 73: 3725-3733. 10.1128/IAI.73.6.3725-3733.2005PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- World Health Organization. Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 2010, 85: 337-348.http:/www.who.int/wer/en/,
- Hogeweg M, Kiran KU, Suneetha S: The significance of facial patches and type 1 reaction for the development of facial nerve damage in leprosy. A retrospective study among 1226 paucibacillary leprosy patients. Lepr Rev. 1991, 62: 143-149.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Smith WC, Nicholls PG, Das L, Barkataki P, Suneetha S, Suneetha L, Jadhav R, Sundar Rao PS, Wilder-Smith EP, Lockwood DN, Van Brakel WH: Predicting neuropathy and reactions in leprosy at diagnosis and before incident events—results from the INFIR cohort study. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2009, 3 (8): e500- 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000500PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Archelos JJ, Hartung HP: Pathogenetic role of autoantibodies in neurological diseases. Trends Neurosci. 2000, 23: 317-327. 10.1016/S0166-2236(00)01575-7View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Scollard DM, Chaduvula MV, Martinez A, Fowlkes N, Nath I, Stryjewska BM, Kearney MT, Williams DL: Increased CXC ligand 10 levels and gene expression in Type 1 leprosy reactions. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2011, 18: 947-953. 10.1128/CVI.00042-11PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hellqvist E, Kvarnström M, Söderberg A, Vrethem M, Ernerudh J, Rosen A: Myelin protein zero is naturally processed in the B cells of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance of immunoglobulin M isotype: aberrant triggering of a patient’s T cells. Haematologica. 2010, 95: 627-636. 10.3324/haematol.2009.015123PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Suneetha LM, Singh SS, Vani M, Vardhini D, Scollard D, Archelos JJ, Srinivasulu M, Suneetha S: Mycobacterium leprae binds to a major human peripheral nerve glycoprotein myelin P zero (P0). Neurochem Res. 2003, 28: 1393-1399. 10.1023/A:1024904717612View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Raju R, Devi SK, Mehervani C, Shiva Kumar A, Meena AK, Reddy PP, Pranay P, Jain S, Archelos-Gracia JJ, Suneetha S, Suneetha LM: Antibodies to myelin P0 and ceramide perpetuate neuropathy in long standing treated leprosy patients. Neurochem Res. 2011, 36: 766-773. 10.1007/s11064-010-0397-7View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kaplan G: Potential of thalidomide and thalidomide analogues as immunomodulatory drugs in leprosy and leprosy reactions. Lepr Rev. 2000, 71: S117-S120.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Verma KK, Srivastava P, Minz A, Verma K: Role of Azathioprine in preventing recurrences in a patient of recurrent erythema nodosum leprosum. Lepr Rev. 2006, 77: 225-229.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Van Veen NH, Lockwood DN, Van Brakel WH, Ramirez J, Richardus JH: Interventions for erythema nodosum leprosum. A Cochrane review. Lepr Rev. 2009, 80: 355-372.PubMedGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.