It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Epidemiological contact tracing complemented with genotyping of clinical Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates is important for understanding disease transmission. In Sweden, tuberculosis (TB) is mostly reported in migrant and homeless where epidemiologic contact tracing could pose a problem. This study compared epidemiologic linking with genotyping in a low burden country. Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates (n = 93) collected at Scania University Hospital in Southern Sweden were analysed with the standard genotyping method mycobacterial interspersed repetitive units-variable number tandem repeats (MIRU-VNTR) and the results were compared with whole genome sequencing (WGS). Using a maximum of twelve single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) as the upper threshold of genomic relatedness noted among hosts, we identified 18 clusters with WGS comprising 52 patients with overall pairwise genetic maximum distances ranging from zero to nine SNPs. MIRU-VNTR and WGS clustered the same isolates, although the distribution differed depending on MIRU-VNTR limitations. Both genotyping techniques identified clusters where epidemiologic linking was insufficient, although WGS had higher correlation with epidemiologic data. To summarize, WGS provided better resolution of transmission than MIRU-VNTR in a setting with low TB incidence. WGS predicted epidemiologic links better which could consolidate and correct the epidemiologically linked cases, avoiding thus false clustering.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
; Tenland Erik 1 ; Welinder-Olsson, Christina 2 ; Medstrand Patrik 6 ; Kaijser Bertil 2 ; Godaly Gabriela 1
1 Lund University, Laboratory medicine, Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Glycobiology, Lund, Sweden (GRID:grid.4514.4) (ISNI:0000 0001 0930 2361)
2 University of Gothenburg, Department of Infectious Diseases, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden (GRID:grid.8761.8) (ISNI:0000 0000 9919 9582)
3 Umeå University, National Bioinformatics Infrastructure Sweden (NBIS), SciLifeLab, Department of Molecular Biology, Computational Life Science Cluster, Umeå, Sweden (GRID:grid.12650.30) (ISNI:0000 0001 1034 3451)
4 Regional Office for Infectious Disease Control and Prevention, Malmö, Sweden (GRID:grid.12650.30); Lund University, Translational Medicine, Clinical Infection medicine, Lund, Sweden (GRID:grid.4514.4) (ISNI:0000 0001 0930 2361)
5 Lund University, Translational Medicine, Clinical Infection medicine, Lund, Sweden (GRID:grid.4514.4) (ISNI:0000 0001 0930 2361)
6 Lund University, Translational medicine, Department of Clinical Virology, Malmö, Sweden (GRID:grid.4514.4) (ISNI:0000 0001 0930 2361)




