4.3 Article

Mycobacterium tuberculosis rrs A1401G mutation correlates with high-level resistance to kanamycin, amikacin, and capreomycin in clinical isolates from mainland China

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2013.06.031

关键词

Mycobacterium tuberculosis; rrs A1401G; Kanamycin; Amikacin; Capreomycin

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation [81071316, 81271882]
  2. National Megaprojects for Key Infectious Diseases [2008ZX10003-006, 2012ZX10003-003]
  3. New Century Excellent Talents in Universities [NCET-11-0703]
  4. Southwest University [ky2011003, kb2009010, kb2010017, ky2009009]
  5. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [XDJK2012D007, XDJK2011D006, XDJK2012D011, XDJK2013D003, XDJK2011C020, XDJK2013A003]
  6. Natural Science Foundation Project of CQ CSTC [2010BB5002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mutations correlating phenotypic resistance level with the injectable second-line anti-tuberculosis drugs (SLDs) including kanamycin (MAN), amikacin (AMK), and capreomycin (CAP) remain elusive. A collection of 114 Mycobacterium tuberculosis clinical isolates from mainland China was analyzed. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of each strain was determined and the sequences of rrs, tlyA, promoter of eis as well as 5' untranslated region (UTR) of whiB7 were amplified and sequenced. No mutation in tly A, promoter of eis and 5' UTR of whiB7, was found to be associated with resistance among these samples. Sequencing data of 1400 rrs region demonstrated the A1401G mutation in rrs was prevalent, which presented in 84% of the MAN resistant isolates while only in about 50% of the AMK or CAP resistant isolates. Furthermore, most of the resistant isolates with A1401G mutation showed high-level resistance to these injectable SLDs. In conclusion, our results suggest the rrs A1401G mutation was related to high-level resistance to KAN, AMK, and CAP in M. tuberculosis isolates from mainland China. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.3
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