Cargando…

One Day in Denmark: Comparison of Phenotypic and Genotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in Bacterial Isolates From Clinical Settings

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) should be fast and accurate, leading to proper interventions and therapeutic success. Clinical microbiology laboratories rely on phenotypic methods, but the continuous improvement and decrease in the cost of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) technologies make t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rebelo, Ana Rita, Bortolaia, Valeria, Leekitcharoenphon, Pimlapas, Hansen, Dennis Schrøder, Nielsen, Hans Linde, Ellermann-Eriksen, Svend, Kemp, Michael, Røder, Bent Løwe, Frimodt-Møller, Niels, Søndergaard, Turid Snekloth, Coia, John Eugenio, Østergaard, Claus, Westh, Henrik, Aarestrup, Frank M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9226621/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35756053
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.804627
_version_ 1784733947101446144
author Rebelo, Ana Rita
Bortolaia, Valeria
Leekitcharoenphon, Pimlapas
Hansen, Dennis Schrøder
Nielsen, Hans Linde
Ellermann-Eriksen, Svend
Kemp, Michael
Røder, Bent Løwe
Frimodt-Møller, Niels
Søndergaard, Turid Snekloth
Coia, John Eugenio
Østergaard, Claus
Westh, Henrik
Aarestrup, Frank M.
author_facet Rebelo, Ana Rita
Bortolaia, Valeria
Leekitcharoenphon, Pimlapas
Hansen, Dennis Schrøder
Nielsen, Hans Linde
Ellermann-Eriksen, Svend
Kemp, Michael
Røder, Bent Løwe
Frimodt-Møller, Niels
Søndergaard, Turid Snekloth
Coia, John Eugenio
Østergaard, Claus
Westh, Henrik
Aarestrup, Frank M.
author_sort Rebelo, Ana Rita
collection PubMed
description Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) should be fast and accurate, leading to proper interventions and therapeutic success. Clinical microbiology laboratories rely on phenotypic methods, but the continuous improvement and decrease in the cost of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) technologies make them an attractive alternative. Studies evaluating the performance of WGS-based prediction of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) for selected bacterial species have shown promising results. There are, however, significant gaps in the literature evaluating the applicability of WGS as a diagnostics method in real-life clinical settings against the range of bacterial pathogens experienced there. Thus, we compared standard phenotypic AST results with WGS-based predictions of AMR profiles in bacterial isolates without preselection of defined species, to evaluate the applicability of WGS as a diagnostics method in clinical settings. We collected all bacterial isolates processed by all Danish Clinical Microbiology Laboratories in 1 day. We randomly selected 500 isolates without any preselection of species. We performed AST through standard broth microdilution (BMD) for 488 isolates (n = 6,487 phenotypic AST results) and compared results with in silico antibiograms obtained through WGS (Illumina NextSeq) followed by bioinformatics analyses using ResFinder 4.0 (n = 5,229 comparisons). A higher proportion of AMR was observed for Gram-negative bacteria (10.9%) than for Gram-positive bacteria (6.1%). Comparison of BMD with WGS data yielded a concordance of 91.7%, with discordant results mainly due to phenotypically susceptible isolates harboring genetic AMR determinants. These cases correspond to 6.2% of all isolate-antimicrobial combinations analyzed and to 6.8% of all phenotypically susceptible combinations. We detected fewer cases of phenotypically resistant isolates without any known genetic resistance mechanism, particularly 2.1% of all combinations analyzed, which corresponded to 26.4% of all detected phenotypic resistances. Most discordances were observed for specific combinations of species-antimicrobial: macrolides and tetracycline in streptococci, ciprofloxacin and β-lactams in combination with β-lactamase inhibitors in Enterobacterales, and most antimicrobials in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. WGS has the potential to be used for surveillance and routine clinical microbiology. However, in clinical microbiology settings and especially for certain species and antimicrobial agent combinations, further developments in AMR gene databases are needed to ensure higher concordance between in silico predictions and expected phenotypic AMR profiles.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9226621
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92266212022-06-25 One Day in Denmark: Comparison of Phenotypic and Genotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in Bacterial Isolates From Clinical Settings Rebelo, Ana Rita Bortolaia, Valeria Leekitcharoenphon, Pimlapas Hansen, Dennis Schrøder Nielsen, Hans Linde Ellermann-Eriksen, Svend Kemp, Michael Røder, Bent Løwe Frimodt-Møller, Niels Søndergaard, Turid Snekloth Coia, John Eugenio Østergaard, Claus Westh, Henrik Aarestrup, Frank M. Front Microbiol Microbiology Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) should be fast and accurate, leading to proper interventions and therapeutic success. Clinical microbiology laboratories rely on phenotypic methods, but the continuous improvement and decrease in the cost of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) technologies make them an attractive alternative. Studies evaluating the performance of WGS-based prediction of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) for selected bacterial species have shown promising results. There are, however, significant gaps in the literature evaluating the applicability of WGS as a diagnostics method in real-life clinical settings against the range of bacterial pathogens experienced there. Thus, we compared standard phenotypic AST results with WGS-based predictions of AMR profiles in bacterial isolates without preselection of defined species, to evaluate the applicability of WGS as a diagnostics method in clinical settings. We collected all bacterial isolates processed by all Danish Clinical Microbiology Laboratories in 1 day. We randomly selected 500 isolates without any preselection of species. We performed AST through standard broth microdilution (BMD) for 488 isolates (n = 6,487 phenotypic AST results) and compared results with in silico antibiograms obtained through WGS (Illumina NextSeq) followed by bioinformatics analyses using ResFinder 4.0 (n = 5,229 comparisons). A higher proportion of AMR was observed for Gram-negative bacteria (10.9%) than for Gram-positive bacteria (6.1%). Comparison of BMD with WGS data yielded a concordance of 91.7%, with discordant results mainly due to phenotypically susceptible isolates harboring genetic AMR determinants. These cases correspond to 6.2% of all isolate-antimicrobial combinations analyzed and to 6.8% of all phenotypically susceptible combinations. We detected fewer cases of phenotypically resistant isolates without any known genetic resistance mechanism, particularly 2.1% of all combinations analyzed, which corresponded to 26.4% of all detected phenotypic resistances. Most discordances were observed for specific combinations of species-antimicrobial: macrolides and tetracycline in streptococci, ciprofloxacin and β-lactams in combination with β-lactamase inhibitors in Enterobacterales, and most antimicrobials in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. WGS has the potential to be used for surveillance and routine clinical microbiology. However, in clinical microbiology settings and especially for certain species and antimicrobial agent combinations, further developments in AMR gene databases are needed to ensure higher concordance between in silico predictions and expected phenotypic AMR profiles. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-06-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9226621/ /pubmed/35756053 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.804627 Text en Copyright © 2022 Rebelo, Bortolaia, Leekitcharoenphon, Hansen, Nielsen, Ellermann-Eriksen, Kemp, Røder, Frimodt-Møller, Søndergaard, Coia, Østergaard, Westh and Aarestrup. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Microbiology
Rebelo, Ana Rita
Bortolaia, Valeria
Leekitcharoenphon, Pimlapas
Hansen, Dennis Schrøder
Nielsen, Hans Linde
Ellermann-Eriksen, Svend
Kemp, Michael
Røder, Bent Løwe
Frimodt-Møller, Niels
Søndergaard, Turid Snekloth
Coia, John Eugenio
Østergaard, Claus
Westh, Henrik
Aarestrup, Frank M.
One Day in Denmark: Comparison of Phenotypic and Genotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in Bacterial Isolates From Clinical Settings
title One Day in Denmark: Comparison of Phenotypic and Genotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in Bacterial Isolates From Clinical Settings
title_full One Day in Denmark: Comparison of Phenotypic and Genotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in Bacterial Isolates From Clinical Settings
title_fullStr One Day in Denmark: Comparison of Phenotypic and Genotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in Bacterial Isolates From Clinical Settings
title_full_unstemmed One Day in Denmark: Comparison of Phenotypic and Genotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in Bacterial Isolates From Clinical Settings
title_short One Day in Denmark: Comparison of Phenotypic and Genotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing in Bacterial Isolates From Clinical Settings
title_sort one day in denmark: comparison of phenotypic and genotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing in bacterial isolates from clinical settings
topic Microbiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9226621/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35756053
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.804627
work_keys_str_mv AT rebeloanarita onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT bortolaiavaleria onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT leekitcharoenphonpimlapas onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT hansendennisschrøder onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT nielsenhanslinde onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT ellermanneriksensvend onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT kempmichael onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT røderbentløwe onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT frimodtmøllerniels onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT søndergaardturidsnekloth onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT coiajohneugenio onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT østergaardclaus onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT westhhenrik onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings
AT aarestrupfrankm onedayindenmarkcomparisonofphenotypicandgenotypicantimicrobialsusceptibilitytestinginbacterialisolatesfromclinicalsettings