↓ Skip to main content

Comparative Genomic Analysis of Two Clonally Related Multidrug Resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis by Single Molecule Real Time Sequencing

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparative Genomic Analysis of Two Clonally Related Multidrug Resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis by Single Molecule Real Time Sequencing
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fcimb.2017.00478
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kenneth Siu-Sing Leung, Gilman Kit-Hang Siu, Kingsley King-Gee Tam, Sabrina Wai-Chi To, Rahim Rajwani, Pak-Leung Ho, Samson Sai-Yin Wong, Wei W. Zhao, Oliver Chiu-Kit, Wing-Cheong Yam

Abstract

Background: Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) is posing a major threat to global TB control. In this study, we focused on two consecutive MDR-TB isolated from the same patient before and after the initiation of anti-TB treatment. To better understand the genomic characteristics of MDR-TB, Single Molecule Real-Time (SMRT) Sequencing and comparative genomic analyses was performed to identify mutations that contributed to the stepwise development of drug resistance and growth fitness in MDR-TB under in vivo challenge of anti-TB drugs. Result: Both pre-treatment and post-treatment strain demonstrated concordant phenotypic and genotypic susceptibility profiles toward rifampicin, pyrazinamide, streptomycin, fluoroquinolones, aminoglycosides, cycloserine, ethionamide, and para-aminosalicylic acid. However, although both strains carried identical missense mutations at rpoB S531L, inhA C-15T, and embB M306V, MYCOTB Sensititre assay showed that the post-treatment strain had 16-, 8-, and 4-fold elevation in the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) toward rifabutin, isoniazid, and ethambutol respectively. The results have indicated the presence of additional resistant-related mutations governing the stepwise development of MDR-TB. Further comparative genomic analyses have identified three additional polymorphisms between the clinical isolates. These include a single nucleotide deletion at nucleotide position 360 of rv0888 in pre-treatment strain, and a missense mutation at rv3303c (lpdA) V44I and a 6-bp inframe deletion at codon 67-68 in rv2071c (cobM) in the post-treatment strain. Multiple sequence alignment showed that these mutations were occurring at highly conserved regions among pathogenic mycobacteria. Using structural-based and sequence-based algorithms, we further predicted that the mutations potentially have deleterious effect on protein function. Conclusion: This is the first study that compared the full genomes of two clonally-related MDR-TB clinical isolates during the course of anti-TB treatment. Our work has demonstrated the robustness of SMRT Sequencing in identifying mutations among MDR-TB clinical isolates. Comparative genome analysis also suggested novel mutations at rv0888, lpdA, and cobM that might explain the difference in antibiotic resistance and growth pattern between the two MDR-TB strains.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Researcher 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 16 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 13%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 18 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 December 2017.
All research outputs
#13,498,179
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#2,212
of 6,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,464
of 324,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#40
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,977 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.