Francis J. Curry National Tuberculosis Center, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, San Francisco General Hospital, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California 94110, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 2010 Feb;48(2):575-8. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01604-09. Epub 2009 Dec 23.
The use of IS6110 as a marker for molecular epidemiological studies is limited when a Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolate has five or fewer copies of IS6110. Restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis with a highly polymorphic GC-rich repetitive sequence located in the plasmid pTBN12 (PGRS RFLP) and spoligotyping (based on the polymorphism of the DR region) are two frequently used secondary typing methods. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of these two methods in a population-based study in San Francisco. We included all patients with culture-positive tuberculosis from 1999 to 2007 with IS6110 RFLP results presenting five or fewer bands. PGRS RFLP and spoligotyping were performed using standardized methods. We determined the concordance between the two methods regarding cluster status and the risk factors for an isolate to be in a cluster with each of the methods. Our data indicate that both methods had similar discriminatory power and that the risk factors associated with clustering by either method were the same. Although the cluster/unique status was concordant in 84% of the isolates, patients were clustered differently depending on the method. Therefore, the methods are not interchangeable, and the same method should be used for longitudinal studies.
当结核分枝杆菌分离株中 IS6110 的拷贝数为 5 个或更少时,使用 IS6110 作为分子流行病学研究的标志物是有限的。限制片段长度多态性分析与位于质粒 pTBN12 中的高度多态性 GC 丰富重复序列(PGRS RFLP)和 spoligotyping(基于 DR 区域的多态性)是两种常用的次要分型方法。本研究旨在比较这两种方法在旧金山基于人群的研究中的表现。我们纳入了所有在 1999 年至 2007 年间具有 IS6110 RFLP 结果呈 5 个或更少条带的培养阳性肺结核患者。使用标准化方法进行 PGRS RFLP 和 spoligotyping。我们确定了两种方法在簇状态和每种方法的分离物聚类风险因素方面的一致性。我们的数据表明,两种方法都具有相似的分辨能力,并且与两种方法中的任何一种方法相关的聚类风险因素都是相同的。尽管 84%的分离株的簇/独特状态是一致的,但根据方法的不同,患者的聚类方式也不同。因此,这些方法不能互换,并且应该在纵向研究中使用相同的方法。