4.7 Article

Influence of helminth infections on the clinical course of and immune response to Leishmania braziliensis cutaneous leishmaniasis

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 195, Issue 1, Pages 142-148

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1086/509808

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. FOGARTY INTERNATIONAL CENTER [R24TW007988, D43TW007127] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES [P50AI030639, T32AI007613] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. FIC NIH HHS [R24 TW007988, 1 D43 TW007127] Funding Source: Medline
  4. NIAID NIH HHS [T32 AI-07613, AI-30639] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Helminth infections influence the clinical outcome of and immune response to certain immune-mediated diseases. Methods. We conducted a cohort study of 120 patients to examine the role that intestinal helminth infection plays in the clinical course of and immune response to cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) treated with pentavalent antimony. Results. Patients coinfected with Leishmania braziliensis and helminths took longer to heal (relative hazard for healing, 0.47 [95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.85]; P = .01) than patients with CL without helminths, with 70% of coinfected patients being cured at 90 days, compared with 92% of helminth-free patients. Coinfected patients had an immune response shifted toward the T helper 2 type, with increased total immunoglobulin E levels (P < .06) and a tendency toward increased interleukin-5 levels, compared with helminth- free patients with CL. Conclusions. Helminths influence both the clinical outcome and the immune response of patients with CL. These results may have clinical implications for the care of patients with CL caused by Leishmania braziliensis, because screening for and treatment of helminths may improve responses to treatment and possibly reduce the risk of progression to mucosal disease.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available