4.7 Article

Mixed Infections and Rifampin Heteroresistance among Mycobacterium tuberculosis Clinical Isolates

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 53, 期 7, 页码 2138-2147

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.03507-14

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [31200985]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mixed infections and heteroresistance of Mycobacterium tuberculosis contribute to the difficulty of diagnosis, treatment, and control of tuberculosis. However, there is still no proper solution for these issues. This study aimed to investigate the potential relationship between mixed infections and heteroresistance and to determine the high-risk groups related to these factors. A total of 499 resistant and susceptible isolates were subjected to spoligotyping and 24-locus variable-number tandem repeat methods to analyze their genotypic lineages and the occurrence of mixed infections. Two hundred ninety-two randomly selected isolates were sequenced on their rpoB gene to examine mutations and heteroresistance. The results showed that 12 patients had mixed infections, and the corresponding isolates belonged to Manu2 (n = 8), Beijing (n = 2), T (n = 1), and unknown (n = 1) lineages. Manu2 was found to be significantly associated with mixed infections (odds ratio, 47.72; confidence interval, 9.68 to 235.23; P<0.01). Four isolates (1.37%) were confirmed to be heteroresistant, which was caused by mixed infections in three (75%) isolates; these belonged to Manu2. Additionally, 3.8% of the rifampin-resistant isolates showing no mutation in the rpoB gene were significantly associated with mixed infections (chi(2), 56.78; P<0.01). This study revealed for the first time that Manu2 was the predominant group in the cases of mixed infections, and this might be the main reason for heteroresistance and a possible mechanism for isolates without any mutation in the rpoB gene to become rifampin resistant. Further studies should focus on this lineage to clarify its relevance to mixed 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