02118nas a2200397 4500000000100000008004100001260001300042653001500055653001000070653000900080653002800089653002600117653002300143653001000166653001100176653003100187653001100218653001200229653002500241653000900266653001600275653002500291653002200316653003200338100001800370700001600388700001400404700001500418700001200433700001600445245007600461300001000537490000700547520115200554022001401706 1994 d c1994 Jan10aAdolescent10aAdult10aAged10aAntibodies, Antinuclear10aAntibodies, Bacterial10aC-Reactive Protein10aChild10aFemale10aHost-Parasite Interactions10aHumans10aleprosy10aLeprosy, lepromatous10aMale10aMiddle Aged10aMycobacterium leprae10aRheumatoid Factor10aSensitivity and Specificity1 aKirsztajn G M1 aNishida S K1 aSILVA M S1 aLombardi C1 aAjzen H1 aPereira A B00aSpecific and nonspecific aspects of humoral immune response in leprosy. a43-540 v273 a
1. We have studied some generic and specific aspects of the humoral immune response in 96 patients with leprosy (29 paucibacillary and 67 multibacillary individuals). We determined serum immunoglobulins (IgM, IgG and IgA), CH50, C1q, C3 and C4, circulating immune complexes (CIC), C-reactive protein (CRP), rheumatoid factor (RF) and antinuclear antibodies. No specific pattern of general humoral immune changes could be observed. 2. The specific immune response was studied by the detection of specific IgM anti-M. leprae antibodies. An immunoradiometric assay (IRMA) and an ELISA were compared for clinical effectiveness. IRMA showed greater sensitivity for the serodiagnosis of leprosy as compared to ELISA (88.1% vs 58.2% for multibacillary patients and 20.7% vs 10.3% for paucibacillary leprosy patients). Specificity was 96% for IRMA and 97% for ELISA. 3. Our results indicate that nonspecific changes in the humoral immune response are of little value in assessing leprosy patients and that immune assays for the detection of specific anti-M. leprae antibodies may be of value in the diagnosis, study and follow-up of these patients.
a0100-879X