Boldbaatar Gantuya1,2, Hashem B El Serag3, Batsaikhan Saruuljavkhlan4, Dashdorj Azzaya4, Takashi Matsumoto4, Tomohisa Uchida5, Khasag Oyuntsetseg1,2, Nyamdorj Oyunbileg1, Duger Davaadorj1,2, Yoshio Yamaoka3,4,6. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, Mongolian National University of Medical Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. 2. Endoscopy Unit, Mongolia-Japan Hospital, Mongolian National University of Medical Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. 3. Department of Medicine, Gastroenterology and Hepatology Section, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. 4. Department of Environmental and Preventive Medicine, Oita University Faculty of Medicine, Yufu, Oita, Japan. 5. Department of Molecular Pathology, Oita University faculty of Medicine, Yufu, Oita, Japan. 6. Global Oita Medical Advanced Research Center of Health, Yufu, Oita, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing is an accurate method of detecting microbial infection without culture. It is unclear if sequencing has additional benefits over routine diagnostic methods for Helicobacter pylori testing. METHODS: We enrolled Mongolian volunteers with dyspepsia. Using routine diagnostic methods, positive H. pylori was defined as positive results on histology/immunohistochemistry, culture, rapid urease test, or serology; negative H. pylori was defined by negative results from all these tests. We performed 16S rRNA sequencing on gastric biopsy specimens and calculated cutoffs for operational taxonomic units (OTUs) and relative abundance (RA) to define positive results using ROC curves. RESULTS: We examined 161 individuals with a mean age of 43.6 years, and 64.6% were women. Using routine diagnostic methods, 122 (75.8%) participants were H. pylori positive, the sensitivity and specificity for 16S rRNA sequencing were 94.3% and 82.1% or 93.4% and 82.1% when cutoff values were set to 1113 (OTU number) or 4.4% RA, respectively (both p < .001). When combining the validated values, the concordance rate was high (91.1%); however, 16S rRNA sequencing had additional positive yield in 9 cases (5.6%) compared with routine diagnostic methods, and much greater additional positive yield compared to histopathology/IHC, culture, RUT, serology separately with 12 (7.4%), 37 (23.0%) and 43 (26.7%). CONCLUSION: 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing detects potentially important proportion of H. pylori-positive cases that test negative with routine diagnostic methods. The quantitative number of H. pylori can help to understand how it can be changing by diseases and RA give opportunity to understand how H. pylori communicate with other microbiota.
BACKGROUND: 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing is an accurate method of detecting microbial infection without culture. It is unclear if sequencing has additional benefits over routine diagnostic methods for Helicobacter pylori testing. METHODS: We enrolled Mongolian volunteers with dyspepsia. Using routine diagnostic methods, positive H. pylori was defined as positive results on histology/immunohistochemistry, culture, rapid urease test, or serology; negative H. pylori was defined by negative results from all these tests. We performed 16S rRNA sequencing on gastric biopsy specimens and calculated cutoffs for operational taxonomic units (OTUs) and relative abundance (RA) to define positive results using ROC curves. RESULTS: We examined 161 individuals with a mean age of 43.6 years, and 64.6% were women. Using routine diagnostic methods, 122 (75.8%) participants were H. pylori positive, the sensitivity and specificity for 16S rRNA sequencing were 94.3% and 82.1% or 93.4% and 82.1% when cutoff values were set to 1113 (OTU number) or 4.4% RA, respectively (both p < .001). When combining the validated values, the concordance rate was high (91.1%); however, 16S rRNA sequencing had additional positive yield in 9 cases (5.6%) compared with routine diagnostic methods, and much greater additional positive yield compared to histopathology/IHC, culture, RUT, serology separately with 12 (7.4%), 37 (23.0%) and 43 (26.7%). CONCLUSION: 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing detects potentially important proportion of H. pylori-positive cases that test negative with routine diagnostic methods. The quantitative number of H. pylori can help to understand how it can be changing by diseases and RA give opportunity to understand how H. pylori communicate with other microbiota.
Authors: F Schluenzen; A Tocilj; R Zarivach; J Harms; M Gluehmann; D Janell; A Bashan; H Bartels; I Agmon; F Franceschi; A Yonath Journal: Cell Date: 2000-09-01 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: W Fischbach; P Malfertheiner; P Lynen Jansen; W Bolten; J Bornschein; S Buderus; E Glocker; J C Hoffmann; S Koletzko; J Labenz; J Mayerle; S Miehlke; J Mössner; U Peitz; C Prinz; M Selgrad; S Suerbaum; M Venerito; M Vieth Journal: Z Gastroenterol Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Giovanni Brandi; Bruno Biavati; Carlo Calabrese; Marta Granata; Anna Nannetti; Paola Mattarelli; Giulio Di Febo; Gioconda Saccoccio; Guido Biasco Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2006-06-16 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Elisabeth M Bik; Paul B Eckburg; Steven R Gill; Karen E Nelson; Elizabeth A Purdom; Fritz Francois; Guillermo Perez-Perez; Martin J Blaser; David A Relman Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-01-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Martin J Sergeant; Chrystala Constantinidou; Tristan Cogan; Charles W Penn; Mark J Pallen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-05-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Olabisi Oluwabukola Coker; Zhenwei Dai; Yongzhan Nie; Guijun Zhao; Lei Cao; Geicho Nakatsu; William Kk Wu; Sunny Hei Wong; Zigui Chen; Joseph J Y Sung; Jun Yu Journal: Gut Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Joshua P Earl; Nithin D Adappa; Jaroslaw Krol; Archana S Bhat; Sergey Balashov; Rachel L Ehrlich; James N Palmer; Alan D Workman; Mariel Blasetti; Bhaswati Sen; Jocelyn Hammond; Noam A Cohen; Garth D Ehrlich; Joshua Chang Mell Journal: Microbiome Date: 2018-10-23 Impact factor: 14.650