Search

The interruption of leprosy transmission is one of the main challenges for leprosy control programs since no consistent evidence exists that transmission has been reduced after the introduction of multidrug therapy. Sources of infection are primarily people with high loads of bacteria with or without clinical signs of leprosy. The availability of a simple test system for the detection of antibodies to phenolic glycolipid-I (PGL-I) of Mycobacterium leprae to identify these individuals may be important in the prevention of transmission. We have developed a lateral flow assay, the ML Flow test, for the detection of antibodies to PGL-I which takes only 10 min to perform. An agreement of 91% was observed between enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and our test; the agreement beyond chance (kappa value) was 0.77. We evaluated the use of whole blood by comparing 539 blood and serum samples from an area of high endemicity. The observed agreement was 85.9% (kappa = 0.70). Storage of the lateral flow test and the running buffer at 28 degrees C for up to 1 year did not influence the results of the assay. The sensitivity of the ML Flow test in correctly classifying MB patients was 97.4%. The specificity of the ML Flow test, based on the results of the control group, was 90.2%. The ML Flow test is a fast and easy-to-perform method for the detection of immunoglobulin M antibodies to PGL-I of M. leprae. It does not require any special equipment, and the highly stable reagents make the test robust and suitable for use in tropical countries.

Among the many reported applications of the detection of antibodies to phenolic glycolipid-I (PGL-I) of Mycobacterium leprae, in particular, the use of seroprevalence as an indicator of the magnitude of the leprosy problem may turn out to be very useful in leprosy control programs. An operational function of serology within the leprosy control services requires a simple test system. We have developed a simple dipstick assay for the detection of antibodies to PGL-I and compared its performance with that of an ELISA. A high degree of agreement (97.2%) was observed between the ELISA and the dipstick assay when tested on 435 sera; the agreement beyond chance (Kappa value) was 0.92. No significant difference was found between the dipstick assay and the ELISA when seropositivity rates obtained in groups of leprosy patients, household contacts, and controls were compared. The interpretation of the dipstick results as positive or negative was unequivocal, as illustrated by the high agreement between different persons reading the test (Kappa values > 0.88). Storage of the only reagents required, the dipsticks and the stabilized detection reagent, up to three weeks under tropical conditions of high temperatures, high humidity, and exposure to light, did not influence the results of the assay. The dipstick assay described here is an easy-to-perform method for the detection of IgM antibodies to PGL-I of M. leprae; it does not require any special equipment and the highly stable reagents make the test robust and suitable for use in tropical countries. An internal control validates the performance of the assay. This dipstick assay may be the method of choice for epidemiologic mapping of leprosy.