ArticleClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2012
Inhibition of angiogenesis as a new therapeutic target in the treatment of lepromatous leprosy.
Article in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of interleukin 7 and platelet-derived growth factor-BB mRNA expression as potential markers in erythema nodosum leprosum.Dermatology reports · 2024Article
- Involvement of TNF-Producing CD8The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2019Article
- Angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis in the spectrum of leprosy and its reactional forms.PloS one · 2013Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAngiogenesis was suggested to have a significant role in the pathogenesis of leprosy. However, the benefit of inhibiting angiogenesis in lepromatous leprosy patients has not previously been studied. The purpose of this study was to evaluate angiogenesis in leprosy patients before and after treatment with multidrug therapy (MDT) with and without minocycline.
methodsA total of 40 patients with lepromatous leprosy were enrolled in this study. They were categorized into two equal groups (A and B), each formed of 20 patients. Group A received World Health Organization MDT, and Group B received MDT combined with minocycline, which has a known antiangiogenic effect. Microvascular density (MVD) in dermal granuloma was evaluated in both groups by immunostaining with CD31 and CD34 markers before and after 6 months of treatment.
resultsWith CD31 immunostaining, the mean MVD in Group A significantly decreased from 39.1 ± 3.1 vessels (v)/high power field (HPF) to 16.5 ± 2.7 v/HPF, and in Group B it significantly decreased from 38.3 ± 2.5 v/HPF to 7.6 ± 1.9 v/HPF. CD34 immunostaining also showed a significant decrease of MVD from 42.2 ± 3.1 v/HPF to 18.8 ± 2.4 v/HPF in Group A, and in Group B it significantly decreased from 43.7 ± 2.3 v/HPF to 11.5 ± 1.6 v/HPF. The reduction of MVD was significantly higher in Group B compared with in Group A (P < 0.0001). Moreover, there was a significant reduction in bacterial density (assessed by bacterial index) in the cutaneous lesions of in Group B (decreased from 4.9 ± 0.3 to 1.4 ± 0.2) compared with in Group A (decreased from 5.1 ± 0.4 to 2.3 ± 0.4).
conclusionThe synergistic effect of MDT and minocycline seems to be promising in the treatment of lepromatous leprosy. It significantly reduces angiogenesis and rapidly eliminates lepra bacilli from the skin that enables a rapid control and elimination of the disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.