This comparative effectiveness study shows alternative therapy achieves comparable outcomes in leprosy patients, suggesting it as a viable option for those at risk of hypersensitivity.
Background In HLA-B*13:01 -positive multibacillary (MB) leprosy patients, dapsone-containing multidrug therapy (MDT) carries a high risk of dapsone hypersensitivity syndrome (DHS). Alternative regimens (dapsone-free) are adopted, but their long-term efficacy compared with standard MDT in HLA-B*13:01 -negative patients remains inadequately characterized. Methodology This retrospective cohort study analyzed MB patients (2015–2023) from the National Leprosy Prevention and Control Management Information System (LEPMIS) with ≥1-year follow-up. Primary outcomes (cure/relapse rates, bacterial index (BI), leprosy reactions, and disability progression) and secondary outcomes (adverse events and treatment duration) were compared between HLA-B*13:01 -positive patients receiving alternative therapy (rifampicin + clofazimine ± clarithromycin/ofloxacin/minocycline) and negative patients receiving standard MDT (rifampicin + clofazimine + dapsone). Findings Among the 271 enrolled MB patients (120 HLA-B*13:01 -positive, 151 negative), alternative therapy showed comparable efficacy to standard MDT in cure rates (67.6% vs. 65.8% at Year 5), the rate of BI decline (89.92% vs. 95.11% at Year 5), smear negativity rates (71.43% vs. 75.00% at Year 5) and relapse rates (0.46 vs. 0.20 per 100 person-years). Kaplan-Meier survival functions revealed no significant differences in leprosy reactions or disability progression. Additionally, alternative therapy demonstrated comparable safety to MDT (1.67% vs. 2.65%, P = 0.70). Conclusions In our study, dapsone-free alternative regimens demonstrated comparable clinical efficacy and safety to standard MDT in MB patients, providing a viable option for HLA-B*13:01 carriers. These findings, limited by the observational design and regimen heterogeneity, warrant further investigation in prospective trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: