Correlation of CRISPR/Cas and Antimicrobial Resistance in Klebsiella pneumoniae Clinical Isolates Recovered from Patients in Egypt Compared to Global Strains

The CRISPR/Cas system has been long known to interfere with the acquisition of foreign genetic elements and was recommended as a tool for fighting antimicrobial resistance. The current study aimed to explore the prevalence of the CRISPR/Cas system in Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates recovered from patients in Egypt in comparison to global strains and correlate the CRISPR/Cas to susceptibility to antimicrobial agents. A total of 181 clinical isolates were PCR-screened for cas and selected antimicrobial resistance genes (ARGs). In parallel, 888 complete genome sequences were retrieved from the NCBI database for in silico analysis. CRISPR/Cas was found in 46 (25.4%) isolates, comprising 18.8% type I-E and 6.6% type I-E*. Multidrug resistance (MDR) and extensive drug resistance (XDR) were found in 73.5% and 25.4% of the isolates, respectively. More than 95% of the CRISPR/Cas-bearing isolates were MDR (65.2%) or XDR (32.6%). No significant difference was found in the susceptibility to the tested antimicrobial agents among the CRISPR/Cas-positive and -negative isolates. The same finding was obtained for the majority of the screened ARGs. Among the published genomes, 23.2% carried CRISPR/Cas, with a higher share of I-E* (12.8%). They were confined to specific sequence types (STs), most commonly ST147, ST23, ST15, and ST14. More plasmids and ARGs were carried by the CRISPR/Cas-negative group than others, but their distribution in the two groups was not significantly different. The prevalence of some ARGs, such as bla(KPC), bla(TEM), and rmtB, was significantly higher among the genomes of the CRISPR/Cas-negative strains. A weak, nonsignificant positive correlation was found between the number of spacers and the number of resistance plasmids and ARGs. In conclusion, the correlation between CRISPR/Cas and susceptibility to antimicrobial agents or bearing resistance plasmids and ARGs was found to be nonsignificant. Plasmid-targeting spacers might not be naturally captured by CRISPR/Cas. Spacer match analysis is recommended to provide a clearer image of the exact behavior of CRISPR/Cas towards resistance plasmids.