02849nas a2200409 4500000000100000008004100001260001300042653001500055653001000070653002600080653001000106653002100116653002600137653001100163653001900174653001100193653001400204653001200218653000900230653001600239653002500255653002300280100001400303700001200317700001400329700001300343700001300356700001400369700001200383245010100395856006600496300001200562490000700574050001500581520182900596022001402425 2004 d c2004 Dec10aAdolescent10aAdult10aAntibodies, Bacterial10aChild10aChild, Preschool10aEpidemiologic Methods10aFemale10aHealth Surveys10aHumans10aIndonesia10aleprosy10aMale10aMiddle Aged10aMycobacterium leprae10aSocial Environment1 aBakker MI1 aHatta M1 aKwenang A1 aFaber WR1 aBeers SM1 aKlatser P1 aOskam L00aPopulation survey to determine risk factors for Mycobacterium leprae transmission and infection. uhttp://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/33/6/1329.full.pdf+html a1329-360 v33 aBAKKER20043 a

BACKGROUND: Not every leprosy patient is equally effective in transmitting Mycobacterium leprae. We studied the spatial distribution of infection (using seropositivity as a marker) in the population to identify which disease characteristics of leprosy patients are important in transmission.

METHODS: Clinical data and blood samples for anti-M. leprae ELISA were collected during a cross-sectional survey on five Indonesian islands highly endemic for leprosy. A geographic information system (GIS) was used to define contacts of patients. We investigated spatial clustering of patients and seropositive people and used logistic regression to determine risk factors for seropositivity.

RESULTS: Of the 3986 people examined for leprosy, 3271 gave blood. Seroprevalence varied between islands (1.7-8.7%) and correlated significantly with leprosy prevalence. Five clusters of patients and two clusters of seropositives were detected. In multivariate analysis, seropositivity significantly differed by leprosy status, age, sex, and island. Serological status of patients appeared to be the best discriminator of contact groups with higher seroprevalence: contacts of seropositive patients had an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.75 (95% CI 0.922-3.31). This increased seroprevalence was strongest for contact groups living < or =75 m of two seropositive patients (aOR = 3.07; 95% CI 1.74-5.42).

CONCLUSIONS: In this highly endemic area for leprosy, not only household contacts of seropositive patients, but also people living in the vicinity of a seropositive patient were more likely to harbour antibodies against M. leprae. Through measuring the serological status of patients and using a broader definition of contacts, higher risk groups can be more specifically identified.

 a0300-5771