| Literature DB >> 31929521 |
Jiwoong Kim1, David E Greenberg2,3, Reed Pifer2, Shuang Jiang4, Guanghua Xiao1,5,6, Samuel A Shelburne7, Andrew Koh3,5,8, Yang Xie1,5,6, Xiaowei Zhan1,5,9.
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is an increasing threat to public health. Current methods of determining AMR rely on inefficient phenotypic approaches, and there remains incomplete understanding of AMR mechanisms for many pathogen-antimicrobial combinations. Given the rapid, ongoing increase in availability of high-density genomic data for a diverse array of bacteria, development of algorithms that could utilize genomic information to predict phenotype could both be useful clinically and assist with discovery of heretofore unrecognized AMR pathways. To facilitate understanding of the connections between DNA variation and phenotypic AMR, we developed a new bioinformatics tool, variant mapping and prediction of antibiotic resistance (VAMPr), to (1) derive gene ortholog-based sequence features for protein variants; (2) interrogate these explainable gene-level variants for their known or novel associations with AMR; and (3) build accurate models to predict AMR based on whole genome sequencing data. We curated the publicly available sequencing data for 3,393 bacterial isolates from 9 species that contained AMR phenotypes for 29 antibiotics. We detected 14,615 variant genotypes and built 93 association and prediction models. The association models confirmed known genetic antibiotic resistance mechanisms, such as blaKPC and carbapenem resistance consistent with the accurate nature of our approach. The prediction models achieved high accuracies (mean accuracy of 91.1% for all antibiotic-pathogen combinations) internally through nested cross validation and were also validated using external clinical datasets. The VAMPr variant detection method, association and prediction models will be valuable tools for AMR research for basic scientists with potential for clinical applicability.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31929521 PMCID: PMC7015433 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007511
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Comput Biol ISSN: 1553-734X Impact factor: 4.475
Fig 3Examples of variant-phenotype relationships determined by the association models.
(A) K18768.0 indicates blaKPC, the K. pneumoniae carbapenemase. The presence of blaKPC is associated with resistance to ceftazidime in K. pneumoniae as shown. The numbers in the plots represent the frequency of certain MIC (minimal inhibitory concentration) values. Numbers in the plot represent total number of isolates with the given MIC value. (B) K18093.13 is oprD, an imipenem/basic amino acid-specific outer membrane pore; absence of oprD is associated with resistance to imipenem in P. aeruginosa. (C) K18790.0 represents blaOXA-1, the beta-lactamase class D OXA-1. Its presence is associated with resistance to cefepime in E. coli. (D) K19278.0 is aac6-lb gene. The presence of this variant is associated with amikacin resistance in A. baumannii. The “+” and “-”sign in the X-axis represent whether the wild-type gene exists or not. The red horizontal lines mark the mean and standard error of the groupwise MIC measurements. Each gray dot represents an MIC value. P-values are calculated based on Fisher’s exact test. MIC: minimal inhibitory concentration.
Prediction metrics for 32 VAMPr prediction models.
Among 93 prediction models, we listed the top 32 models that have the mean prediction accuracies higher than 95%. The isolate and variant counts derived from sequencing were used to build the prediction model using gradient boosting tree algorithms. The accuracy is reported using nested cross validation approach. The 10-fold outer cross validation were used to report accuracy and the 5-fold inner cross validation was used for hyperparameter tuning.
| Species | Antibiotics | Isolate counts | Variant Counts | Fraction of Resistant Isolates | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| tetracycline | 315 | 1,321 | 6.0% | 100.0% | |
| meropenem | 173 | 1,218 | 5.8% | 100.0% | |
| amoxicillin | 171 | 1,208 | 2.3% | 100.0% | |
| kanamycin | 75 | 827 | 13.3% | 100.0% | |
| tetracycline | 31 | 540 | 9.7% | 100.0% | |
| clindamycin | 24 | 479 | 37.5% | 100.0% | |
| trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole | 1,349 | 1,620 | 0.7% | 99.6% | |
| cefuroxime | 178 | 1,221 | 9.6% | 99.4% | |
| cefoxitin | 1,291 | 1,483 | 15.9% | 99.3% | |
| chloramphenicol | 1,337 | 1,510 | 3.3% | 99.3% | |
| amoxicillin-clavulanic acid | 1,285 | 1,476 | 19.8% | 99.1% | |
| kanamycin | 1,036 | 1,373 | 9.4% | 98.9% | |
| ceftiofur | 1,340 | 1,489 | 19.0% | 98.8% | |
| ceftriaxone | 1,345 | 1,536 | 19.3% | 98.7% | |
| tetracycline | 1,339 | 1,518 | 53.0% | 98.6% | |
| ampicillin | 1,349 | 1,620 | 33.2% | 98.5% | |
| clindamycin | 316 | 1,323 | 3.5% | 98.4% | |
| tobramycin | 58 | 1,014 | 5.2% | 98.3% | |
| gentamicin | 1,333 | 1,507 | 12.3% | 98.0% | |
| cefotaxime | 294 | 1,808 | 97.3% | 97.6% | |
| doripenem | 204 | 2,027 | 25.0% | 97.6% | |
| trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole | 275 | 1,143 | 5.8% | 96.4% | |
| amikacin | 465 | 3,427 | 9.7% | 96.4% | |
| tetracycline | 261 | 3,096 | 23.0% | 96.2% | |
| amikacin | 269 | 1,750 | 6.3% | 95.9% | |
| doripenem | 44 | 1,167 | 47.7% | 95.8% | |
| imipenem | 143 | 1,049 | 22.4% | 95.8% | |
| ciprofloxacin | 367 | 3,257 | 73.3% | 95.4% | |
| erythromycin | 317 | 1,323 | 28.1% | 95.3% | |
| tobramycin | 66 | 1,468 | 39.4% | 95.2% | |
| ampicillin | 348 | 2,180 | 92.0% | 95.1% | |
| ertapenem | 318 | 1,983 | 86.2% | 95.0% |
External validation of VAMPr prediction model.
The external dataset includes 13 Enterobacter cloacae, 31 Escherichia coli, 24 Klebsiella pneumoniae and 21 Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates. All isolates were tested against 3 antibiotics (cefepime, ceftazidime and meropenem). We reported the accuracy as the fraction of correct predictions, and the AUROC (area under the receiver operator curve) represents the area under the operator-receiver characteristic. The AUROC value is n/a for E. cloacae as all 13 isolates are susceptible to meropenem.
| Species | Antibiotics | Isolate counts | Accuracy | AUROC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| cefepime | 11 | 100.0% | 1.00 | |
| meropenem | 13 | 92.3% | n/a | |
| cefepime | 30 | 63.3% | 0.70 | |
| ceftazidime | 28 | 78.6% | 0.88 | |
| meropenem | 31 | 96.8% | 1.00 | |
| cefepime | 24 | 70.8% | 0.87 | |
| ceftazidime | 24 | 66.7% | 0.99 | |
| meropenem | 23 | 78.3% | 1.00 | |
| cefepime | 18 | 83.3% | 1.00 | |
| ceftazidime | 21 | 52.4% | 0.88 | |
| meropenem | 20 | 95.0% | 0.98 |