4.2 Article

Sublineages of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Beijing genotype strains and unfavorable outcomes of anti-tuberculosis treatment

Journal

TUBERCULOSIS
Volume 95, Issue 3, Pages 336-342

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.tube.2015.02.040

Keywords

Beijing genotype; Sublineage; Recurrence; Treatment failure; Vietnam

Funding

  1. Program of Japan Initiative for Global Research Network on Infectious Diseases (J-GRID), MEXT, Japan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The influence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) lineages/sublineages on unfavorable tuberculosis (TB) treatment outcomes is poorly understood. We investigated the effects of Beijing genotype sublineages and other factors contributing to treatment outcome. Patients newly diagnosed with sputum smear-positive and culture-positive TB in Hanoi, Vietnam, participated in the study. After receiving anti-TB treatment, they were intensively followed up for the next 16 months. MTB isolates collected before treatment were subjected to drug susceptibility testing, and further analyzed to determine MTB (sub) lineages and their clonal similarities. Of 430 patients, 17 had treatment failure and 30 had TB recurrence. Rifampicin resistance was associated with treatment failure {adjusted odds ratio = 6.64 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.48-29.73]}. The modern Beijing genotype was significantly associated with recurrent TB within 16 months [adjusted hazard ratio = 3.29 (95% CI, 1.17-9.27)], particularly after adjustment for the relevant antibiotic resistance. Human immunodeficiency virus coinfection and severity on chest radiographs were not significantly associated with unfavorable outcomes. Our findings provide further understanding of the influence of MTB strains on unfavorable treatment outcomes. Multiple risk factors should be considered for the optimal management of TB. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available