4.7 Article

Rifampin Resistance Missed in Automated Liquid Culture System for Mycobacterium tuberculosis Isolates with Specific rpoB Mutations

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 51, Issue 8, Pages 2641-2645

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02741-12

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Damien Foundation (Belgium)
  2. European Collaborative Project TB PAN-NET [FP7 HEALTH-2007-2.3.2-10]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

WHO-endorsed phenotypic drug susceptibility testing (DST) methods for Mycobacterium tuberculosis are assumed to be the gold standard for identifying rifampin (RMP) resistance. However, previous results indicated that low-level, yet probably clinically relevant, RMP resistance linked to specific rpoB mutations is easily missed by some growth-based methods. We aimed to compare the level of resistance detected on Lowenstein-Jensen (LJ) medium with resistance detected by the Bactec MGIT 960 automated DST (MGIT-DST) system for various rpoB mutants. Full agreement between LJ and MGIT-DST was observed for mutations located at codons 513 (Lys or Pro) and 531 (Leu, Trp), which were always resistant by both methods. For mutations 511Pro, 516Tyr, 533Pro, 572Phe, and several 526 mutations, LJ and MGIT results were highly discordant, with MGIT-DST failing to give a result or declaring the strains susceptible. Our data show that phenotypic RMP resistance testing of M. tuberculosis is not a binary phenomenon for some rpoB mutations and that the widely used automated MGIT 960 system is prone to miss some RMP resistance-conferring mutations, while careful DST on LJ missed hardly any. Given the association of these mutations with poor clinical outcome, our findings suggest that the gold standard for rifampin resistance should be reconsidered, in order to address the present confusion caused by discrepancies between phenotypic and genotypic results. The impacts of these mutations will depend on the frequency of their occurrence, which may vary from one setting to another.

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