| Literature DB >> 27464737 |
Van Anh Thi Nguyen1,2, Anne-Laure Bañuls3,4, Thanh Hoa Thi Tran3, Kim Lien Thi Pham3, Thai Son Nguyen5, Hung Van Nguyen6, Ngoc Lan Thi Nguyen7, Nam Lien Thi Nguyen8, Duc Anh Dang3, Guy B Marks9,10, Marc Choisy4,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mycobacterium tuberculosis, the tuberculosis (TB) pathogen, despite a low level of genetic diversity, has revealed a high variety of biological and epidemiological characteristics linked to their lineages, such as transmissibility, fitness and propensity to acquire drug resistance. This has important implications for the epidemiology of TB. We conducted this first countrywide cross-sectional study to identify the prevalent M. tuberculosis lineages and to assess their epidemiological associations and their relation to drug resistance. The study was conducted among isolates acquired in reference hospitals across Vietnam. Isolates with drug susceptibility testing profiles were identified for their lineages by spoligotyping. Logistic regression was used to investigate the association of M. tuberculosis lineages with location, age and sex of the patients and drug resistance levels.Entities:
Keywords: Drug resistance; Lineage; Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Reference hospital; Tuberculosis; Vietnam
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27464737 PMCID: PMC4964266 DOI: 10.1186/s12866-016-0784-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
Fig. 1Study population. Note: ref.: reference, MTB: M. tuberculosis, DR: drug resistance
Fig. 2The proportion of male patients by age correcting for location and M.tuberculosis lineage. Note: The line is the logistic model prediction together with 95 % CI (shaded area)
M. tuberculosis lineages and sub-lineages at the regional reference hospitals
| Lineage | Sub-lineage | Location | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | North | Centre | South | ||
| n (col. %) | n (col. %) | n (col. %) | n (col. %) | ||
| Beijing |
|
|
|
| |
| EAI |
|
|
|
| |
| EAI2 | 2 (0.7) | 1 (1.0) | 1 (1.0) | ||
| EAI2_Manilla | 1 (0.3) | 1 (1.0) | |||
| EAI4_VNM | 44 (14.8) | 6 (6.1) | 27 (27.0) | 11 (11.0) | |
| EAI5 | 35 (11.7) | 1 (1.0) | 30 (30.0) | 4 (4.0) | |
| T |
|
|
|
| |
| T1 | 14 (4.7) | 9 (9.2) | 2 (2.0) | 3 (3.0) | |
| T2 | 3 (1.0) | 2 (2.0) | 1 (1.0) | ||
| T3 | 1 (0.3) | 1 (1.0) | |||
| T5_RUS1 | 1 (0.3) | 1 (1.0) | |||
| LAM |
|
|
|
| |
| LAM10 | 1 (0.3) | 1 (1.0) | |||
| LAM9 | 3 (0.7) | 1 (1.0) | 1 (1.0) | 1 (1.0) | |
| H | H3 |
|
| ||
| Zero |
|
| |||
| U |
|
|
|
| |
| Total |
|
|
|
| |
The bold numbers are the total numbers of isolates belonging to the M. tuberculosis lineages presented on the same lines in the first column, equal to the sum of the numbers of isolates of the sublineages (presented on the second column) under these lineages
Comparison of the proportion of M. tuberculosis lineages at the regional reference hospitals
| Lineage | Region | OR (95 % CI) | OR (95 % CI) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| North | Centre | South | (North & South) vs. Centre |
| North vs. South |
| |
| n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | |||||
| Beijing | 69 (70.4) | 28 (28.0) | 68 (68.0) | 1.7 (1.4–2.0) | <0.0001 | 1.0 (0.7–1.0) | 0.8223 |
| EAI | 7 (7.1) | 58 (58.0) | 17 (17.0) | 0.5 (0.4–0.6) | <0.0001 | 1.6 (1.0–2.6) | 0.0419 |
| Others | 22 (22.5) | 14 (14.0) | 15 (15.0) | 1.1 (0.9–1.4) | 0.2570 | 0.8 (0.5–1.1) | 0.1580 |
a: Logistic regressions, correcting for age and sex of the patients
Fig. 3Distribution of M. tuberculosis lineages by age at the regional reference hospitals. Note: The lines are the logistic model predictions (corrected for patients’ gender) of the proportion of Beijing (red), EAI (blue) and lineages other than Beijing and EAI (green) together with 95 % CI (shaded area)
Drug resistance levels of M. tuberculosis lineages at the regional reference hospitals
| Resistance | Lineage/ Sub-lineage | Location | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | North | Centre | South | ||
| n a (col.%) b | n a (col.%) b | n a (col. %) b | n a (col.%) b | ||
| INH | All |
|
|
|
|
| Beijing | 165 (53.9) | 69 (58.0) | 28 (32.1) | 68 (58.8) | |
| EAI | 82 (14.8) | 7 (14.3) | 58 (3.5) | 17 (52.9) | |
| EAI4_VNM | 44 (16.3) | 6 (0.0) | 27 (3.7) | 11 (54.5) | |
| Others | 51 (32.7) | 22 (31.8) | 14 (7.1) | 15 (60.0) | |
| RMP | All |
|
|
|
|
| Beijing | 165 (34.5) | 69 (34.8) | 28 (21.4) | 68 (39.7) | |
| EAI | 82 (9.9) | 7 (14.3) | 58 (0.0) | 17 (41.2) | |
| EAI4_VNM | 44 (11.6) | 6 (0.0) | 27 (0.0) | 11 (45.5) | |
| Others | 51 (15.4) | 22 (13.6) | 14 (0.0) | 15 (33.3) | |
| SM | All |
|
|
|
|
| Beijing | 165 (63.0) | 69 (66.7) | 28 (42.9) | 68 (67.6) | |
| EAI | 82 (6.1) | 7 (14.3) | 58 (0.0) | 17 (23.5) | |
| EAI4_VNM | 44 (7.0) | 6 (0.0) | 27 (0.0) | 11 (27.3) | |
| Others | 51 (34.6) | 22 (36.4) | 14 (14.3) | 15 (53.3) | |
| EMB | All |
|
|
|
|
| Beijing | 165 (25.5) | 69 (27.5) | 28 (14.3) | 68 (27.9) | |
| EAI | 82 (3.7) | 7 (14.3) | 58 (0.0) | 17 (11.7) | |
| EAI4_VNM | 44 (4.6) | 6 (0.0) | 27 (0.0) | 11 (18.1) | |
| Others | 51 (9.6) | 22 (13.6) | 14 (0.0) | 15 (13.3) | |
| MDR | All |
|
|
|
|
| Beijing | 165 (33.3) | 68 (34.8) | 28 (21.4) | 68 (36.7) | |
| EAI | 82 (9.9) | 7 (14.3) | 58 (0.0) | 17 (41.2) | |
| EAI4_VNM | 44 (11.6) | 6 (0.0) | 27 (0.0) | 11 (45.5) | |
| Others | 51 (15.4) | 22 (13.6) | 14 (0.0) | 15 (33.3) | |
a:Total number of isolates
b:Proportion of drug resistant isolates
The bold numbers show the total sums and proportions of drug resistance (in bracket) for all isolates, irrespective of their lineages
Comparison of dug resistance levels of M. tuberculosis lineages in the different regions
| Resistance | Region a | Lineage b | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| North | Centre vs. North | South vs. North | Beijing | EAI vs. Beijing | Others vs. Beijing | |
| OR (95 % CI) | OR (95 % CI) | OR (95 % CI) | OR (95 % CI) | |||
| INH | 1.0 | 0.2 (0.1–0.6) | 1.6 (0.9–3.0) | 1.0 | 0.2 (0.1–0.6) | 0.4 (0.2–0.9) |
| RMP | 1.0 | 0.2 (0.1–0.6) | 1.9 (0.9–3.5) | 1.0 | 0.4 (0.1-0.9) | 0.4 (0.2–0.9) |
| SM | 1.0 | 0.3 (0.1–0.7) | 1.3 (0.7–2.5) | 1.0 | 0.1 (0.0–0.2) | 0.3 (0.2–0.7) |
| EMB | 1.0 | 0.2 (0.1–0.7) | 1.2 (0.6–2.5) | 1.0 | 0.2 (0.1–0.7) | 0.3 (0.1–0.9) |
| MDR | 1.0 | 0.2 (0.1–0.6) | 1.7 (0.9–3.2) | 1.0 | 0.4 (0.2–1.0) | 0.4 (0.2–0.9) |
a:Logistic regressions correcting for M. tuberculosis lineage, age and sex of the patients
b:Logistic regressions correcting for region, age and sex of the patients
Association of the drug resistance levels of M. tuberculosis with gender and age of the patients by logistic regression analysis
| Resistance | Sex (Male vs. female) b | Age quintile a, c | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95 % CI) |
| II vs. I | III vs. I | IV vs. I | V vs. I |
| |
| OR (95 % CI) | OR (95 % CI) | OR (95 % CI) | OR (95 % CI) | ||||
| INH | 1.5 (0.8–2.8) | 0.25 | 4.1 (1.8–9.6) | 4.2 (1.7–10.3) | 3.2 (1.4–7.6) | 0.8 (0.3–2.2) | 0.0002 |
| RMP | 2.4 (1.2–4.8) | 0.01 | 2.9 (1.1–7.3) | 2.9 ((1.1–7.6) | 2.5 (1.0–6.5) | 1.1 (0.3–3.6) | 0.08 |
| SM | 1.5 (0.8–3.0) | 0.2 | 2.0 (0.9–4.6) | 2.6 (1.0–6.4) | 2.1 (0.9–5.1) | 0.6 (0.2–1.6) | 0.02 |
| EMB | 2.4 (1.1–5.1) | 0.02 | 3.8 (1.3–10.8) | 3.8 (1.3–11.4) | 1.4 (0.5–4.5) | 1.7 (0.5–6.2) | 0.04 |
| MDR | 2.5 (1.3–4.9) | 0.009 | 2.6 (1.0–6.7) | 2.9 (1.1–7.6) | 2.3 (0.9–5.9) | 1.1 (0.3–3.5) | 0.11 |
a: I, II, III, IV and V: age quintile, the cut-points for age quintiles are 2 (min), 28, 37, 46, 57 and 86 (max)
b: Correcting for region, lineage and age
c: Correcting for region, lineage and sex