4.7 Article

Whole-Genome Phylogenomic Heterogeneity of Neisseria gonorrhoeae Isolates with Decreased Cephalosporin Susceptibility Collected in Canada between 1989 and 2013

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 53, 期 1, 页码 191-200

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02589-14

关键词

-

资金

  1. Public Health Agency of Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A large-scale, whole-genome comparison of Canadian Neisseria gonorrhoeae isolates with high-level cephalosporin MICs was used to demonstrate a genomic epidemiology approach to investigate strain relatedness and dynamics. Although current typing methods have been very successful in tracing short-chain transmission of gonorrheal disease, investigating the temporal evolutionary relationships and geographical dissemination of highly clonal lineages requires enhanced resolution only available through whole-genome sequencing (WGS). Phylogenomic cluster analysis grouped 169 Canadian strains into 12 distinct clades. While some N. gonorrhoeae multiantigen sequence types (NG-MAST) agreed with specific phylogenomic clades or subclades, other sequence types (ST) and closely related groups of ST were widely distributed among clades. Decreased susceptibility to extended-spectrum cephalosporins (ESC-DS) emerged among a group of diverse strains in Canada during the 1990s with a variety of nonmosaic penA alleles, followed in 2000/2001 with the penA mosaic X allele and then in 2007 with ST1407 strains with the penA mosaic XXXIV allele. Five genetically distinct ESC-DS lineages were associated with penA mosaic X, XXXV, and XXXIV alleles and nonmosaic XII and XIII alleles. ESC-DS with coresistance to azithromycin was observed in 5 strains with 23S rRNA C2599T or A2143G mutations. As the costs associated with WGS decline and analysis tools are streamlined, WGS can provide a more thorough understanding of strain dynamics, facilitate epidemiological studies to better resolve social networks, and improve surveillance to optimize treatment for gonorrheal infections.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据