J van Beek1, M Haanperä2, P W Smit3, S Mentula2, H Soini4. 1. Department of Health Security, National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), Helsinki, Finland; European Programme for Public Health Microbiology Training (EUPHEM), European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), Stockholm, Sweden. 2. Department of Health Security, National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), Helsinki, Finland. 3. Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Institute (GGD Amsterdam), Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Health Security, National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: hanna.soini@thl.fi.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Culture-based assays are currently the reference standard for drug susceptibility testing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. They provide good sensitivity and specificity but are time consuming. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether whole genome sequencing (WGS), combined with software tools for data analysis, can replace routine culture-based assays for drug susceptibility testing of M. tuberculosis. METHODS: M. tuberculosis cultures sent to the Finnish mycobacterial reference laboratory in 2014 (n = 211) were phenotypically tested by Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) for first-line drug susceptibilities. WGS was performed for all isolates using the Illumina MiSeq system, and data were analysed using five software tools (PhyResSE, Mykrobe Predictor, TB Profiler, TGS-TB and KvarQ). Diagnostic time and reagent costs were estimated for both methods. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the five software tools to predict any resistance among strains was almost identical, ranging from 74% to 80%, and specificity was more than 95% for all software tools except for TGS-TB. The sensitivity and specificity to predict resistance to individual drugs varied considerably among the software tools. Reagent costs for MGIT and WGS were €26 and €143 per isolate respectively. Turnaround time for MGIT was 19 days (range 10-50 days) for first-line drugs, and turnaround time for WGS was estimated to be 5 days (range 3-7 days). CONCLUSIONS: WGS could be used as a prescreening assay for drug susceptibility testing with confirmation of resistant strains by MGIT. The functionality and ease of use of the software tools need to be improved.
OBJECTIVES: Culture-based assays are currently the reference standard for drug susceptibility testing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. They provide good sensitivity and specificity but are time consuming. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether whole genome sequencing (WGS), combined with software tools for data analysis, can replace routine culture-based assays for drug susceptibility testing of M. tuberculosis. METHODS: M. tuberculosis cultures sent to the Finnish mycobacterial reference laboratory in 2014 (n = 211) were phenotypically tested by Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) for first-line drug susceptibilities. WGS was performed for all isolates using the Illumina MiSeq system, and data were analysed using five software tools (PhyResSE, Mykrobe Predictor, TB Profiler, TGS-TB and KvarQ). Diagnostic time and reagent costs were estimated for both methods. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the five software tools to predict any resistance among strains was almost identical, ranging from 74% to 80%, and specificity was more than 95% for all software tools except for TGS-TB. The sensitivity and specificity to predict resistance to individual drugs varied considerably among the software tools. Reagent costs for MGIT and WGS were €26 and €143 per isolate respectively. Turnaround time for MGIT was 19 days (range 10-50 days) for first-line drugs, and turnaround time for WGS was estimated to be 5 days (range 3-7 days). CONCLUSIONS: WGS could be used as a prescreening assay for drug susceptibility testing with confirmation of resistant strains by MGIT. The functionality and ease of use of the software tools need to be improved.
Authors: Saikou Y Bah; Collins Misita Morang'a; Jonas A Kengne-Ouafo; Lucas Amenga-Etego; Gordon A Awandare Journal: Front Genet Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 4.599
Authors: Keira A Cohen; Abigail L Manson; Christopher A Desjardins; Thomas Abeel; Ashlee M Earl Journal: Genome Med Date: 2019-07-25 Impact factor: 11.117
Authors: Marília Lima da Conceição; Emilyn Costa Conceição; Ismari Perini Furlaneto; Sandro Patroca da Silva; Arthur Emil Dos Santos Guimarães; Pedro Gomes; María Laura Boschiroli; Lorraine Michelet; Thomas Andreas Kohl; Katharina Kranzer; Loreno da Costa Francez; Luana Nepomuceno Gondim Costa Lima; Isabel Portugal; João Perdigão; Karla Valéria Batista Lima Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-02-04 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Nilay Peker; Leonard Schuele; Nienke Kok; Miguel Terrazos; Stefan M Neuenschwander; Jessica de Beer; Onno Akkerman; Silke Peter; Alban Ramette; Matthias Merker; Stefan Niemann; Natacha Couto; Bhanu Sinha; John Wa Rossen Journal: Microb Genom Date: 2021-11
Authors: Konstantina Athanasopoulou; Michaela A Boti; Panagiotis G Adamopoulos; Paraskevi C Skourou; Andreas Scorilas Journal: Life (Basel) Date: 2021-12-26