Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Mycobacteriology and Aerobic Actinomycetes

Does Resistance to Pyrazinamide Accurately Indicate the Presence of Mycobacterium bovis?

Bouke C. de Jong, Anthony Onipede, Alex S. Pym, Sebastien Gagneux, Roxanne S. Aga, Kathryn DeRiemer, Peter M. Small
Bouke C. de Jong
1Division of Infectious Diseases, Stanford University, Stanford, California
2MRC Laboratories, Fajara, The Gambia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: bouke@stanford.edu
Anthony Onipede
1Division of Infectious Diseases, Stanford University, Stanford, California
2MRC Laboratories, Fajara, The Gambia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alex S. Pym
1Division of Infectious Diseases, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sebastien Gagneux
1Division of Infectious Diseases, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Roxanne S. Aga
1Division of Infectious Diseases, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kathryn DeRiemer
1Division of Infectious Diseases, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Peter M. Small
1Division of Infectious Diseases, Stanford University, Stanford, California
3Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, Washington
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.43.7.3530-3532.2005
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Mycobacterium bovis is best identified by screening those isolates of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex that have any pyrazinamide (PZA) resistance, using a confirmatory test such as spoligotyping, biochemical testing, or genomic deletion analysis. The sensitivity for detection of M. bovis is lowered to 82% when only PZA-monoresistant isolates are screened.

Mycobacterium bovis is intrinsically resistant to pyrazinamide (PZA), and the prevalence of clinical infection with M. bovis is low in countries with good bovine tuberculosis control programs. This finding has supported a strategy of using PZA monoresistance as an initial screening tool for M. bovis, a strategy that risks missing cases of infection with M. bovis strains that have broader resistance. A previous study found that screening for M. bovis by using PZA monoresistance had a poor positive predictive value (3), but the study was not able to assess the sensitivity or specificity of PZA resistance screening for the detection of M. bovis as it did not include data on the denominator. We therefore sought to assess the efficacy of using either PZA monoresistance or any PZA resistance to identify M. bovis in a population-based study. At the same time, we estimated the prevalence of M. bovis in San Francisco.

Mycobacterial isolates in all diagnosed cases of tuberculosis in San Francisco were collected in a prospective study (4). The isolates underwent biochemical testing for niacin and nitrate production for identification of species within the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex, as the vast majority of isolates of M. bovis are niacin and nitrate negative (6, 8). Susceptibility testing for PZA and other drugs was done with the Bactec method (S. Siddiqi, Bactec 460TB system product and procedure manual, Becton Dickinson and Co., Sparks, MD). Isolates were sent to Stanford University for standard molecular typing using IS6110 and polymorphic guanine-cytosine-rich sequence (PGRS) restriction fragment length polymorphism (2, 9, 10).

We performed a retrospective cohort study, which included all available isolates from San Francisco from 1991 to 1999 identified as M. bovis by nitrate and niacin testing and all isolates that were PZA resistant. Isolates without a PZA susceptibility test result were excluded. For the identification of M. bovis, isolates were screened for the absence of the region of difference 4 (RD4) and RD9 (1). All M. bovis isolates were screened for the RD1 deletion, which is specific to M. bovis bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) (1). Spoligotyping was also performed (5); M. bovis has a characteristic pattern consisting of deleted direct repeat spacers 39 to 43, and BCG has a characteristic pattern with three additional deletions. Isolates without available DNA were classified based on the biochemical test results only.

Statistical analysis was done using Stata version 8 (Stata Corporation, College Park, TX). We used the chi-square test of proportions or Fisher's exact test to compare the characteristics of cases of M. bovis infection with those of cases of M. tuberculosis infection.

Of 2,476 cases of tuberculosis diagnosed and reported in San Francisco from 1991 to 1999, 2,115 (85.4%) were culture positive and 1,526 (72.2%) had a PZA susceptibility test result. The rate of PZA susceptibility testing varied by year, with <20% of isolates tested from 1993 to 1994, 70 to 80% in 1992 and 1995, and >90% of isolates from other years. PZA testing was random, and isolates of M. bovis as identified by biochemical testing were not more likely to have been tested than non-M. bovis isolates (P = 0.54). Our study identified 30 PZA-resistant isolates; 25 had a viable culture and/or DNA available. PZA monoresistance was present in 18 of 30 isolates (Table 1). One additional isolate was pansensitive and was identified as M. bovis by biochemical testing but as M. tuberculosis by spoligotyping and genomic deletion analysis. Conversely, two PZA-resistant isolates were identified as M. tuberculosis by biochemical testing and as M. bovis by spoligotyping and genomic deletion analysis (Table 2). The sensitivity for detecting M. bovis increased from 81.8% when PZA monoresistance was used to 100% when any PZA resistance was used. Two-thirds of PZA-resistant isolates and half of PZA-monoresistant isolates were M. tuberculosis. The positive predictive values of PZA monoresistance versus any PZA resistance were 50.0 and 36.7%, respectively. The specificity and negative predictive value were >98% with both strategies (Table 3).

After excluding two cases of M. bovis BCG administration for bladder cancer that resulted in genitourinary disease, we identified nine cases of M. bovis infection in San Francisco between 1991 and 1999. These represented 0.6% of all culture-positive cases of tuberculosis with PZA susceptibility test results. One of the nine isolates was identified as M. bovis BCG and was resistant to isoniazid (INH) and PZA. This strain was isolated from a 40-year-old Chinese woman with noncavitary pulmonary disease who had not undergone human immunodeficiency virus testing. Patients infected with M. bovis versus M. tuberculosis were more likely to have been born in Mexico (odds ratio [OR], 33; P < 0.005) and were younger (median ages, 32 and 45 years old, respectively; P = 0.024).

Among the nine M. bovis isolates with IS6110 and PGRS restriction fragment length polymorphism data available, eight had a single IS6110 band. There were two clusters corresponding to two persons with identical genotyping patterns, but there were no epidemiological links between them.

Our results suggest that definitive testing to distinguish M. bovis from M. tuberculosis should include all PZA-resistant isolates, not only those with PZA monoresistance.

The prevalence of M. bovis in San Francisco was 0.6%, similar to the prevalence in other countries with good bovine tuberculosis control programs but lower than the reported 6.6% prevalence in San Diego (7). The association between birth in Mexico and M. bovis infection was similar to that found in the study in San Diego. However, the lower prevalence of M. bovis in San Francisco likely reflects the greater distance of San Francisco from the Mexican border.

The lack of DNA for 5 of the 30 isolates classified by biochemical test results might have introduced misclassification of M. bovis and M. tuberculosis isolates. However, the biochemical test results correlated well with the results of spoligotyping and genomic deletion analysis. Although 28% of the isolates were not tested for PZA resistance, PZA testing was random and should not bias our estimates of the sensitivity and specificity. Given the small number of cases of M. bovis infection, our estimates of sensitivity and positive predictive value have wide confidence intervals. The positive predictive value of PZA resistance for the identification of M. bovis would likely be higher in areas where M. bovis is endemic in cattle. Since the techniques we used are not universally available, optimal testing strategies will vary depending on local resources.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1.

Results of PZA susceptibility testing for isolates in culture-positive cases in San Francisco from 1991 to 1999

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2.

Clinical and test characteristics of strains identified as M. bovis by PZA resistance screeninga in San Francisco from 1991 to 1999

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 3.

Results of PZA susceptibility testing for identification of M. bovis

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was supported by grant TW 06083-01 from the NIH and by NIAID grant AI 34238.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 11 March 2004.
    • Accepted 4 April 2005.
  • Copyright © 2005 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Brosch, R., S. V. Gordon, M. Marmiesse, P. Brodin, C. Buchrieser, K. Eiglmeier, T. Garnier, C. Gutierrez, G. Hewinson, K. Kremer, L. M. Parsons, A. S. Pym, S. Samper, D. van Soolingen, and S. T. Cole. 2002. A new evolutionary scenario for the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA99:3684-3689.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    Chaves, F., Z. Yang, H. el Hajj, M. Alonso, W. J. Burman, K. D. Eisenach, F. Dronda, J. H. Bates, and M. D. Cave. 1996. Usefulness of the secondary probe pTBN12 in DNA fingerprinting of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.34:1118-1123.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    Hannan, M. M., E. P. Desmond, G. P. Morlock, G. H. Mazurek, and J. T. Crawford. 2001. Pyrazinamide-monoresistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the United States. J. Clin. Microbiol.39:647-650.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    Jasmer, R. M., J. A. Hahn, P. M. Small, C. L. Daley, M. A. Behr, A. R. Moss, J. M. Creasman, G. F. Schecter, E. A. Paz, and P. C. Hopewell. 1999. A molecular epidemiologic analysis of tuberculosis trends in San Francisco, 1991-1997. Ann. Intern. Med.130:971-978.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. 5.↵
    Kamerbeek, J., L. Schouls, A. Kolk, M. van Agterveld, D. van Soolingen, S. Kuijper, A. Bunschoten, H. Molhuizen, R. Shaw, M. Goyal, and J. van Embden. 1997. Simultaneous detection and strain differentiation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis for diagnosis and epidemiology. J. Clin. Microbiol.35:907-914.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    Kent, P. T., and G. P. Kubica. 1985. Public health mycobacteriology: a guide for the level III laboratory. Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta, Ga.
  7. 7.↵
    LoBue, P. A., W. Betacourt, C. Peter, and K. S. Moser. 2003. Epidemiology of Mycobacterium bovis disease in San Diego County, 1994-2000. Int. J. Tuberc. Lung Dis.7:180-185.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  8. 8.↵
    Lutz, B. 1992. Identification tests for mycobacteria, p. 3.12.11-3.12.17. In H. G. Isenberg (ed.), Clinical microbiology procedures handbook. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.
  9. 9.↵
    Rhee, J. T., M. M. Tanaka, M. A. Behr, C. B. Agasino, E. A. Paz, P. C. Hopewell, and P. M. Small. 2000. Use of multiple markers in population-based molecular epidemiologic studies of tuberculosis. Int. J. Tuberc. Lung Dis.4:1111-1119.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  10. 10.↵
    van Embden, J. D., M. D. Cave, J. T. Crawford, J. W. Dale, K. D. Eisenach, B. Gicquel, P. Hermans, C. Martin, R. McAdam, T. M. Shinnick, et al. 1993. Strain identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis by DNA fingerprinting: recommendations for a standardized methodology. J. Clin. Microbiol.31:406-409.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Does Resistance to Pyrazinamide Accurately Indicate the Presence of Mycobacterium bovis?
Bouke C. de Jong, Anthony Onipede, Alex S. Pym, Sebastien Gagneux, Roxanne S. Aga, Kathryn DeRiemer, Peter M. Small
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Jul 2005, 43 (7) 3530-3532; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.43.7.3530-3532.2005

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Clinical Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Does Resistance to Pyrazinamide Accurately Indicate the Presence of Mycobacterium bovis?
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Clinical Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Clinical Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Does Resistance to Pyrazinamide Accurately Indicate the Presence of Mycobacterium bovis?
Bouke C. de Jong, Anthony Onipede, Alex S. Pym, Sebastien Gagneux, Roxanne S. Aga, Kathryn DeRiemer, Peter M. Small
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Jul 2005, 43 (7) 3530-3532; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.43.7.3530-3532.2005
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Antitubercular Agents
Drug Resistance, Bacterial
Mycobacterium bovis
pyrazinamide

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About JCM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Board of Editors
  • Editor Conflicts of Interest
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Resources for Clinical Microbiologists
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #JClinMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

 

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0095-1137; Online ISSN: 1098-660X