Unit of Mycobacteriology, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Microbiol Spectr. 2024 Mar 5;12(3):e0007024. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.00070-24. Epub 2024 Feb 9.
Previous work reported unprecedented differences in the intrinsic susceptibility of the complex (MTBC) to pretomanid (Pa) using the Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube (MGIT) system. We tested 125 phylogenetically diverse strains from all known MTBC lineages (1-9) without known Pa resistance mutations and four strains with known resistance mutations as controls. This confirmed that MTBC, unlike most bacteria-antimicrobial combinations, displayed substantial differences in the intrinsic susceptibility relative to the technical variation of Pa MIC testing. This was also the case for the Middlebrook 7H11 (7H11) medium, demonstrating that these differences were not specific to MGIT. Notably, lineage 1 was confirmed to have intrinsically elevated MICs compared with lineages 2, 3, 4, and 7 (L2-4/7), underlining the urgent need for WHO to publish its decision of whether lineage 1 should be deemed treatable by BPaL(M), the now preferred all-oral regimen for treating rifampin-resistant tuberculosis. Lineages 5 and 6, which are most frequent in West Africa, responded differently to Pa, with lineage 5 being more similar to L2-4/7 and lineage 6 being more susceptible. More data are needed to determine whether 7H11 MICs are systematically lower than those in MGIT.
This study confirmed that the complex lineage 1, responsible for 28% of global tuberculosis cases, is less susceptible to pretomanid (Pa). It also refined the understanding of the intrinsic susceptibilities of lineages 5 and 6, most frequent in West Africa, and lineages 8 and 9. Regulators must review whether these differences affect the clinical efficacy of the WHO-recommended BPaL(M) regimen and set breakpoints for antimicrobial susceptibility testing accordingly. Notably, regulators should provide detailed justifications for their decisions to facilitate public scrutiny.
先前的工作报道了分枝杆菌复合群(MTBC)对帕托马尼德(Pa)的固有敏感性存在前所未有的差异,使用分枝杆菌生长指示管(MGIT)系统。我们测试了来自所有已知 MTBC 谱系(1-9)的 125 个具有不同遗传背景的菌株,这些菌株没有已知的 Pa 耐药突变,而四个具有已知耐药突变的菌株作为对照。这证实了 MTBC 与大多数细菌-抗菌药物组合不同,相对于 Pa MIC 测试的技术变异性,其固有敏感性存在显著差异。这同样适用于 Middlebrook 7H11(7H11)培养基,表明这些差异不是 MGIT 特有的。值得注意的是,与谱系 2、3、4 和 7(L2-4/7)相比,谱系 1 被证实固有地具有更高的 MIC,这突出表明世卫组织急需决定是否应将谱系 1 视为 BPaL(M)可治疗的,BPaL(M)是目前治疗耐利福平结核病的首选全口服方案。在西非最常见的谱系 5 和 6 对 Pa 的反应不同,谱系 5 与 L2-4/7 更相似,而谱系 6 更敏感。需要更多的数据来确定 7H11 MIC 是否系统地低于 MGIT 的 MIC。
这项研究证实,负责全球 28%结核病病例的分枝杆菌复合群谱系 1对帕托马尼德(Pa)的敏感性较低。它还细化了对在西非最常见的谱系 5 和 6 以及谱系 8 和 9 的固有敏感性的理解。监管机构必须审查这些差异是否影响世卫组织推荐的 BPaL(M)方案的临床疗效,并相应地设定抗菌药物敏感性测试的断点。值得注意的是,监管机构应为他们的决策提供详细的理由,以方便公众监督。