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

Progression Toward an Improved DNA Amplification-Based Typing Technique in the Study of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Epidemiology

Krishna K. Gopaul, Timothy J. Brown, Andrea L. Gibson, Malcolm D. Yates, Francis A. Drobniewski
Krishna K. Gopaul
Health Protection Agency Mycobacterium Reference Unit, Clinical Research Centre, Barts and the London Medical School, Queen Mary College, University of London, 2 Newark Street, London E1 2AT, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Timothy J. Brown
Health Protection Agency Mycobacterium Reference Unit, Clinical Research Centre, Barts and the London Medical School, Queen Mary College, University of London, 2 Newark Street, London E1 2AT, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrea L. Gibson
Health Protection Agency Mycobacterium Reference Unit, Clinical Research Centre, Barts and the London Medical School, Queen Mary College, University of London, 2 Newark Street, London E1 2AT, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Malcolm D. Yates
Health Protection Agency Mycobacterium Reference Unit, Clinical Research Centre, Barts and the London Medical School, Queen Mary College, University of London, 2 Newark Street, London E1 2AT, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Francis A. Drobniewski
Health Protection Agency Mycobacterium Reference Unit, Clinical Research Centre, Barts and the London Medical School, Queen Mary College, University of London, 2 Newark Street, London E1 2AT, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: f.drobniewski@qmul.ac.uk
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01428-05
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

While high-copy-number IS6110-based restriction fragment length polymorphism (HCN-RFLP) is the gold standard for typing most Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains, the time taken for culturing and low throughput make it impractical for large-scale prospective typing of large numbers of isolates. The development of a new method, mycobacterial interspersed repetitive units (MIRU), a variation of the original variable-number tandem repeat (VNTR) technique, may provide a viable alternative. Panels based on the original 12-loci MIRU (12MIRU), a combination of 12MIRU and remaining ETR loci (15MIRU-VNTR), and an extended panel with an additional 10 novel regions (25VNTR) were used to study three populations with varying degrees of epidemiological data. MIRU discrimination increased with panel size and the addition of spoligotyping. Combining these two techniques enabled a reduction in the panel size from 25 to 14 loci without a significant loss in discrimination. However, 25VNTR alone or in combination with spoligotyping still possessed weaker discrimination than RFLP for high-copy-number isolates.

Molecular typing methods have greatly enhanced our understanding of the epidemiology of tuberculosis and allowed us to identify outbreaks and infer transmission within populations (1, 5, 33, 41). Currently the method giving the highest discrimination between Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains is IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP), a method that relies on the detection of the position of IS6110 elements relative to PvuII restriction sites within the genome (39). This approach provides a high level of discrimination, even though it has been shown that insertion into the genome is not entirely random (12, 31). The highest discrimination is seen where strains contain five or more copies of the IS6110 element, and under these circumstances it should be considered the reference method. It is usual to use a further typing method where fewer IS6110 elements are present. RFLP patterns formed from isogenic strains have been shown to be stable (7, 29), allowing for comprehensive studies over a long time period (10, 11). These studies are in the most part retrospective and have been used to demonstrate linked outbreak cases and risk factors for tuberculosis infection. Prospective typing is also possible using this technique. Such a typing strategy hastens the availability of data, meaning that questions surrounding transmission events and possible outbreaks can be resolved rapidly. In addition, unsuspected outbreaks that would not ordinarily be classified as being related due to geography or time may now be identified. Earlier intervention in both previously suspected and unsuspected outbreaks reduces the risk of further transmission.

There are a number of problems with the IS6110 RFLP technique, however, that make it less useful for long-term prospective studies. A large amount of genomic DNA is required, and the method is labor-intensive, causing delay in typing and limiting the achievable throughput. Furthermore, the level of discrimination seen is not uniform for all strains typed. The highest level of discrimination is seen with strains containing five or more IS6110 copies, referred to as high-copy-number strains (HCN), with clusters formed being largely indivisible by other methods. Less discrimination is seen between strains containing fewer than five IS6110 copies, referred to as low-copy-number strains (LCN); a second method, for example, spoligotyping, can be used to divide such clusters (6, 17, 21).

DNA amplification-based methods overcome delays caused by the need to culture sufficient biomass and are amenable to high-throughput analysis, thus improving throughput. Spoligotyping (21) has a higher throughput than RFLP and can be run using crude extracts of DNA. However, the discriminative power of this technique is lower than that of IS6110 RFLP, which in turn would lead to an overestimation of true transmission if used alone (16) or at least difficulties in interpreting results. Variable-number tandem repeat (VNTR) analysis is another DNA amplification-based typing method. This method enumerates the number of tandem repeats at each of a series of loci throughout a genome by amplification of a given locus using primers targeting flanking regions and determining the length of the resultant fragment. This typing method has been applied to diverse organisms, from humans to the nonculturable bacterium Mycobacterium leprae (18). Analysis of the genomes of both M. tuberculosis H37Rv (8) and M. tuberculosis CDC1551 (14) have indicated 1,500 potential regions that contain tandem repeats that vary in size between 5 and 100 bp (http://minisatellites.u-psud.fr ). Five loci, ETR-A, -B, -C, -D, and -E, were initially identified as showing sufficient variation for the typing of M. tuberculosis strains (15), and some studies showed that the discriminatory power was greater than that of spoligotyping but fell significantly short of that produced by RFLP (4, 13).

More recently, a set of 12 VNTR loci has been described as being useful for the typing of M. tuberculosis; these loci have been designated mycobacterium interspersed repetitive units (MIRU). This set of 12 loci (designated 12MIRU) includes 2 of the previously described set of 5 ETR loci (ETR-D and ETR-E) (25, 32, 37). In addition to the 12 MIRU loci and 5 ETR loci, there is published data on a number of other VNTR loci (24, 30, 35, 36). Existing studies have demonstrated the potential of VNTR typing using 15-loci VNTR (a combination of the 12 MIRU loci and the remaining 3 VNTR loci, designated 15MIRU-VNTR) as a typing tool. Reporting on a series of four investigations using this 15-loci VNTR for typing, a very close correlation was found between the results of IS6110 RFLP and VNTR type (19). There is little data available to assess the performance of VNTR typing of M. tuberculosis in a diverse population with a high proportion of samples with unknown epidemiological links, thus mimicking prospective typing of M. tuberculosis isolates on a population scale. Furthermore, most of the studies done do not compare the results of the VNTR-based testing to that of RFLP analysis. A study made up of these components would categorically demonstrate the usefulness of VNTR-based typing as a substitute for or adjunct to the RFLP method.

In this study, three different M. tuberculosis isolate panels were used to define the role of VNTR typing more clearly, using 25 published VNTR loci, which included the 12 MIRU loci and ETR-A, -B, and -C, in applications from outbreak investigations to prospective typing of large populations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Mycobacterial cultures.Mycobacterial cultures were identified as M. tuberculosis complex using a combination of growth, microscopic, and biochemical characteristics, as well as DNA hybridization tests (Accuprobe; GenProbe, San Diego, Calif.). Cultures were grown on solid Lowenstein-Jensen medium or in Middlebrook 7H9 medium supplemented with 10% (vol/vol) oleic acid-albumen-dextrose-catalase supplement. Samples were incubated for up to 8 weeks in the case of solid media and for 2 weeks in the case of liquid culture.

Mycobacterial cultures were analyzed in three panels, designated studies 1, 2, and 3.

Study 1.Study 1 consisted of 71 isolates drawn from 11 outbreaks investigated by the Health Protection Agency (Mycobacterium Reference Unit), which were coded and analyzed blind using VNTR. Data consisting of RFLP, spoligotyping, rapid epidemiological testing (RAPET) (44), and epidemiological information were combined and formed the basis for the decision analysis for clustering and comparison with the VNTR-determined clustering. MIRU clustering was performed blinded to this information.

Study 2.Study 2 consisted of 126 isolates, for which full epidemiological data were available, out of a total of 174 isolates from patients in one city in the middle of England (Leicester) during a 1-year period known to contain isolates from one major outbreak. The VNTR analysis was again blinded to the RFLP, spoligotyping, RAPET, and epidemiological data that were used to define “true” clustering.

Study 3.Study 3 consisted of 248 isolates randomly selected from a collection of all isolates from culture-positive patients seen in London, England, during the first two months of 1998. This collection was part of a larger study involving 2,500 strains. Very limited epidemiological information was available, and cluster comparison was performed against HCN-RFLP and LCN-RFLP/spoligotype-defined clusters. In this case, these two molecular methods (which indeed are our standard practices) were used in the definition of true clustering.

Extraction of DNA.The extraction and quantification of DNA was performed as described previously (44). Genomic DNA was diluted in distilled water in a ratio of 1:100 before being used for spoligotyping and MIRU/VNTR typing.

IS6110 RFLP and spoligotyping.IS6110 RFLP was performed as previously outlined by van Embden et al. (39). Images were recorded and analyzed using Bionumerics software (Applied Maths, St. Marten-Latem, Belgium). The analysis parameters were as follows: the initial tolerance level was set at 3%, with confirmation of clustering being undertaken by visual inspection. The resulting dendrogram was created using the unweighted-pair group method using average linkages (UPGMA) program. In the case of the third panel, where there was limited epidemiological data, an approach of 100% identity between grouped RFLP patterns was taken to define a cluster. In the case of the first two panels, where this extra information was available, patterns that differed by one band were considered linked if these data were supportive. This occurred once in panel 2, where one band was missing from the 14-band RFLP pattern seen in the other members of an epidemiologically well-defined cluster.

Spoligotyping was performed as previously stated by Kamerbeek et al. (21). Images were transferred and analyzed using Bionumerics software (Applied Maths, St. Martens-Latem, Belgium) using the DICE setting with the dendrogram produced using the UPGMA program.

VNTR typing.Twenty-five VNTR loci were analyzed in each of the M. tuberculosis cultures (designated 25VNTR). The 25 VNTR loci consisted of the 12 MIRU loci described by Supply et al. (37) and Kwara et al. (23). ETR-A, -B, and -C were described by Frothingham and Meeker-O'Connell (15), and an additional 10 loci were from those described by Le Fleche et al. (24); for a listing of the various loci that were used in this study, see Table 2. Primers and dyes used for analysis of the 12 MIRU loci were those used by Kwara et al. (23). In each case only the forward primer was labeled (Proligo France, Paris, France), while reverse primers were unlabeled (Invitrogen, Paisley, United Kingdom). Primers for ETR-A and -B were as described by Frothingham and Meeker-O'Connell (15), with ETR-A labeled with dye 2 and ETR-B labeled with dye 4. Primers for the remaining 11 loci were designed using PrimerSelect (DNAStar, Madison, Wis.) from sequences obtained on the Tuberculist website (http://genolist.pasteur.fr/TubercuList/ ) for M. tuberculosis H37Rv. These primers and the dyes used are described in Table 1.

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

Primers used in this studya

DNA amplification setup and conditions of all analyses were as described by Kwara et al. (23), with the following amendments. It was found that the addition of 1% dimethyl sulfoxide (final volume) improved the efficiency of the amplification reaction. Fragment analysis of labeled PCR products was performed using a CEQ-8000 genetic analysis system (Beckman-Coulter, Fullerton, Calif.) run at 6.0 kV for 45 min. The 12 MIRU loci and ETR-A, -B, and -C loci were analyzed using a 60- to 640-bp ladder labeled with dye 1 (Beckman-Coulter, Fullerton, Calif.). The additional 10 loci were analyzed using both the 60- to 640-bp ladder and a 600- to 1,000-bp ladder again labeled with dye 1 (Bioventures, Murfreesboro, Tenn.).

The resulting data were analyzed on Bionumerics (Applied Maths, St. Marten-Latem, Belgium) software and clustered based on a comparison of character. The dendrogram was created using UPGMA. Samples that could not be analyzed using the automated system were run on 1.5% (wt/vol) agarose gels and sized against a 100-bp ladder (Promega, Madison, Wis.), and sizes were estimated.

Cluster analysis was performed on the three isolate panels using three VNTR loci sets. The first set consisted of the 12 MIRU described by Supply et al. (37), the second was the same set plus the remaining ETR loci, giving a 15MIRU-VNTR set, and the third set was comprised of 25 VNTR loci (designated 25VNTR) as described above. A summary of the composition of the VNTR panels referred to in this study is shown in Table 2. All VNTR analysis was performed blinded to all other epidemiological data.

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

Composition of the VNTR panels used and proposeda

Calculation of the discrimination index.The discrimination index was calculated as described by Hunter and Gaston (20). The closer the value is to 1, the more discriminatory the locus. The results of this testing can be seen in Table 3.

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

Hunter-Gaston index values for each locus

RESULTS

Study 1.Study 1 consisted of 71 isolates involved in 11 outbreak investigations. This included investigations containing both linked and unlinked isolates. Linkage was established using a combination of RFLP (for HCN) or RFLP and spoligotyping (for LCN) and RAPET with other epidemiological (contact tracing) data. The results are summarized in Table 4. The 12MIRU set clustered the isolates that had previously been shown to be linked but also clustered with two further clusters, each containing two RFLP-IS6110 high-copy-number isolates that had no epidemiological links. In both cases the similarity between the RFLP patterns was over 70% (data not shown). The 15MIRU-VNTR set gave the same clustering results as those seen in the original outbreak investigations. Interestingly, the 25VNTR set gave the same results, except for one cluster of three strains, which was divided by two loci, 531 and 2163a, into three unique types (data not shown). Where isolates were analyzed using VNTR in duplicate, identical profiles were seen.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 4.

Clustering data seen with different typing methodsa

Study 2.Study 2 was designed to determine the value of the VNTR technique within a population (n = 125) where the majority of isolates present were shown by RFLP, spoligotyping, and available contact tracing data to be unlinked. This population, however, was known to contain an established outbreak of 12 individuals. As was the case with study 1, the VNTR technique was performed blinded to this information. The results of the various typing strategies on the entire population are shown in Table 4. From this study, it can be seen that in comparison with the conventional strategy of HCN-RFLP and LCN-RFLP/spoligotyping (defined here as “the conventional method”), while 12MIRU and 15MIRU-VNTR both overestimate clustering, 25VNTR is actually more discriminatory than what is currently used. If spoligotyping data are used together with 12MIRU or 15MIRU-VNTR, clustering is reduced to near or below that seen using the conventional method. Adding spoligotyping to 25VNTR does not further reduce clustering seen with this loci set. In order to determine the effect of the proportion of HCN and LCN strains on clustering, the population was sorted into these categories and the typing strategies were reapplied (Table 4). Among the 98 HCN isolates, both 12MIRU and 15MIRU-VNTR overestimated clustering almost twofold in comparison to RFLP. 25VNTR showed the same degree of clustering as RFLP. When applied to the 27 LCN isolates, all the VNTR-based methods proved more discriminatory than the combination of RFLP and spoligotyping. 25VNTR showed there were no clustered isolates within this small population.

Study 3.Study 3 examined a sample of isolates taken from London, which has a different population structure than Leicester, having far more ethnic diversity. Although RFLP and spoligotyping data were available, the VNTR-based techniques were done blinded to this information to mimic how prospective VNTR typing would work. The clustering seen within this panel using the different typing techniques is shown in Table 4.

From this panel of 248 isolates, it was observed that in comparison with the conventional method of HCN-RFLP and LCN-RFLP/spoligotyping, none of the VNTR-based methods used alone performed as well (Table 4). While a threefold drop in clustering was seen between 12MIRU and 25VNTR, 25VNTR showed more clustering than the conventional methods. The addition of spoligotyping data to the VNTR panels dramatically improved discrimination in both the 12MIRU and 15MIRU-VNTR data sets by approximately half and reduced clustering within the 25VNTR set to a figure close to that of the conventional methods.

In order to determine the effect of the proportion of HCN and LCN strains on clustering in this population, the isolates were sorted into these categories and the typing strategies were reapplied (Table 4). RFLP of the HCN isolates (Table 4) gave the lowest clustering values. The VNTR panels gave between three (25VNTR) and eight (12MIRU) times the clustering seen with RFLP used alone. When spoligotyping was added to VNTR, this clustering was reduced to at best more than twice the clustering seen with RFLP.

In the case of the LCN isolates (Table 4), while there was no difference in the clustering rates seen between the conventional method and 12MIRU typing, both 15MIRU-VNTR and 25VNTR reduced the clustering seen from 34.1% to 18.1%. The addition of spoligotyping data to 12MIRU reduced the clustering seen when this technique was applied uniquely. However, it was found that the addition of more loci in this case had no effect on the discrimination seen.

Determination of the individual discriminatory powers of the loci used. While this study has shown that the 25VNTR panel was the most discriminatory of the three used, it is likely that a number of loci provide more discrimination than others, which in turn could allow for the reduction in the size of the panel. To demonstrate this, the Hunter-Gaston index value (20), seen as a marker of discrimination, was calculated for each locus from the results of study 3 and were ranked in decreasing order. Using this ranking as a guide and starting with locus VNTR-3232, the loci with the highest Hunter-Gaston index values were added until the same pattern of clustering seen in study 3 with 25VNTR was seen.

Although a number of loci were highly discriminatory, when added to the panel they provided little further discrimination, while some with lower individual values did. Through the addition and subtraction of loci, a panel of 18 loci was found that gave the same discrimination as 25 loci for study 3. Using the same strategy for determining the best panel to be used alongside spoligotyping, this panel was further reduced from 18 to 14 loci with the removal of 5 loci and the addition of locus MIRU-40.

DISCUSSION

False clustering with VNTR and the similarity of RFLP patterns.The ideal level of discrimination required between strains of M. tuberculosis is dependent upon the use to which the data are being put. At one extreme would be a level of discrimination that would distinguish between M. tuberculosis and other species. At the other extreme would be a level of discrimination capable of distinguishing between subpopulations within a clone. A useful level of discrimination for epidemiological purposes is somewhere between the two, although a higher level is probably required for typing patient populations than that required for investigating suspected outbreaks. Currently the best evidence for a transmission event and hence an epidemiologically useful cluster would be two patients with matching IS6110 RFLP fingerprints as well as spoligotype and conventional epidemiological data. This would be the best reference for evaluating other methods for detecting clusters. When evaluating molecular analytical methods, if higher levels of discrimination than those seen with the IS6110 RFLP and spoligotype fingerprints are seen, the use of conventional epidemiological data becomes essential for defining “true” clusters.

The VNTR analysis of M. tuberculosis makes routine prospective typing of large populations a practical proposition. The highest degree of discrimination is required for the identification of clustered cases in a population that are not apparently linked by any other means. In this study, we define cases that are clustered by one method but differentiated by another as false clusters. If clustering data are used to inform contact tracing, the choice of VNTR methodology must be driven by the need to minimize false clustering and hence “false alarms.” This study accesses the value of different combinations of VNTR loci compared to the reference IS6110-RFLP methodology in a strain panel that is highly characterized at both a molecular and epidemiological level and a population panel of strains.

In a preliminary analysis, we defined clusters based on identical high-copy RFLP as true, while VNTR clusters formed with nonidentical RFLP patterns were false. Previous studies using the same criterion for the definition of a true cluster have shown that the 12MIRU panel indeed gives rise to a high proportion of false clustering events when used alone (22, 26, 37). The addition of the three remaining ETR loci reduces false clustering in a small sample of isolates with known epidemiological linkage, which in turn is analogous to our study panels 1 and 2 (19). In this current study, the rate of false clustering in all three investigations was seen to decrease with an increase in the size of the VNTR panel. However, the addition of the three VNTR loci in each investigation, while reducing the apparent false clustering rate from that seen for 12MIRU, did not eliminate this error completely, an observation also seen with the addition of the other 10 loci.

It has been argued that a degree of variability in RFLP patterns can be tolerated when defining clusters (38). Minor changes may occur as the pathogen is transmitted from host to host over an extended period of time (2, 27, 34, 43). In study 2, one isolate which was clustered by all the VNTR panels but not by RFLP (based on our criterion of identical fingerprints) was indeed incorporated into the cluster on account of strong conventional epidemiology evidence (data not shown). If we consider RFLP clustering being based on ±1 band difference, as in the example above clustered by RFLP, overall only a very small percentage of false clustering would be seen in the study 3 population with the largest 25VNTR panel (2% of the overall total). It has been postulated that the molecular clock for RFLP is faster than that of VNTR (25), and therefore this may account for an overclustering of samples using the VNTR methods.

However, while some factors (such as preferential location sites) are known to affect IS6110 transposition (42), there may be other factors which promote more drastic rearrangements. While it might be correct to assume that high-copy patterns missing one or two bands may be related, this may also be true in cases where there is less similarity.

A general problem with molecular epidemiology of M. tuberculosis is that some strains are more common in a given geographical area or ethnic group from a given area (28, 40). Two indistinguishable strains imply transmission, but in these circumstances this may not necessarily have been recent and may reflect past transmission events in the individual's country of origin. Therefore, if we see two strains from different geographical areas in the United Kingdom that cluster by RFLP from patients of the same ethnic group, this may have occurred through the acquisition of a strain that is endemic overseas rather than a transmission event in the United Kingdom.

The use of other techniques in parallel with VNTR to improve discrimination.From our previous work performed on a subset of isolates from study 3, it was found that a combination of 12MIRU and spoligotyping was more discriminatory than RFLP alone (our unpublished data). It was initially thought that this may have been due to the population structure of this subset, which was mostly made up of low-copy isolates, where it is known that RFLP is less effective (6). However, when spoligotyping data was applied to 15MIRU-VNTR data from studies 2 and 3, it substantially reduced the number of clusters formed and had this same effect when combined with 25VNTR data for study 3. This substantiates the observation of Cowan and colleagues (9), who saw a reduction in clustering rates when combining 12MIRU with spoligotyping. Indeed, this group advocates, and has now introduced, a two-step procedure where a combination of 12MIRU and spoligotyping is used for first-pass typing and RFLP is used to test the clusters formed.

Population structure and the use of VNTR-based typing.Approximately 20% of the reference cultures received at the Health Protection Agency Mycobacterium Reference Unit are of low-copy RFLP patterns (four bands or less). Currently, spoligotyping is the secondary typing system used when testing these strains. However, in this work, we have shown that MIRU-VNTR and 25VNTR have far higher levels of discrimination than both LCN-RFLP and spoligotyping combined (see Table 4). This further validates the use of these VNTR panels in the typing of this subset of isolates. Splitting the populations into HCN and LCN isolates gives an indication of how VNTR typing techniques would perform in situations where a population has a higher proportion of HCN or LCN isolates than in London. Although the numbers of LCN isolates used in this study are small, the VNTR techniques alone or with spoligotyping are radically better than our current methods. Furthermore, we have observed that increasing the proportion of LCN isolates within a population improves VNTR-based techniques versus conventional methods (data not shown). In populations with a significantly higher proportion of LCN isolates, such as the Indian subcontinent, there would be more justification for using VNTR than in locales where HCN strains predominate.

The use of other loci to improve the discrimination.As already shown, the addition of more loci to the panel of 12MIRU elements improved discrimination of this technique. Using the minisatellite database, a further 10 regions have been shown to vary in size between the sequenced H37Rv (8) and CDC1551 (14) M. tuberculosis strains (data not shown). In addition, there are other loci that have been recommended as being highly discriminatory that may improve further on the panels we have utilized in this study (P. Supply, personal communication).

Further, a number of tandem-repeat regions are located within genes defined as PE-poly-GC-rich sequence-like (8). It has been suggested that these genes allow for antigenic variation within tuberculosis infections (3), and these may offer additional variable regions for analysis. However, their small size (9 bp long instead of the 50- to 70-bp elements that have been analyzed here) will offer technical challenges in terms of data interpretation.

The aim of this study was to compare the VNTR typing methods with those currently available to the molecular epidemiologist. From our work, we have shown that while the discriminatory power of VNTR can be improved with a selection of loci, at this time this value is still less than that of the conventional HCN-RFLP and LCN-RFLP/spoligotype techniques.

For prospective typing, the most discriminating combination of VNTR loci should be employed. The data in this study suggest that the 18-loci VNTR set alone or a 14-loci VNTR set, if used in tandem with spoligotyping, would be highly discriminating. Investigation of alternative or additional VNTR loci may improve discrimination further. Application of these tools would minimize the secondary RFLP typing required, which has been shown here to give the maximum discrimination between isolates containing IS6110 in HCN isolates.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We acknowledge the following people who have provided invaluable assistance: Steve Platt, who helped modify the Bionumerics software for analysis, and Annika Krüüner, for her help in preparing the heavily clustered panel of United Kingdom isolates used in study 1. We acknowledge Zack Fang for his help in the undertaking of the RFLPs in study 3.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 14 July 2005.
    • Returned for modification 13 February 2006.
    • Accepted 14 May 2006.
  • Copyright © 2006 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Alland, D., G. E. Kalkut, A. R. Moss, R. A. McAdam, J. A. Hahn, W. Bosworth, E. Drucker, and B. R. Bloom. 1994. Transmission of tuberculosis in New York City. An analysis by DNA fingerprinting and conventional epidemiologic methods. N. Engl. J. Med.330:1710-1716.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. 2.↵
    Altio, A., N. Morcillo, S. Scipioni, A. Dolmann, M. I. Romano, A. Cataldi, and D. van Soolingen. 1999. The IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism in particular multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains may evolve too fast for reliable use in outbreak investigation. J. Clin. Microbiol.37:788-791.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    Banu, S., N. Honore, B. Saint-Joanis, D. Philpott, M. C. Prevost, and S. T. Cole. 2002. Are the PE-PGRS proteins of Mycobacterium tuberculosis variable surface antigens? Mol. Microbiol.44:9-19.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. 4.↵
    Barlow, R. E. L., D. M. Gascoyne-Binzi, S. H. Gillespie, A. Dickens, S. Qamer, and P. M. Hawkey. 2001. Comparison of variable number tandem repeat and IS6110-restriction fragment length polymorphism analyses for discrimination of high- and low-copy-number IS6110 Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates. J. Clin. Microbiol.39:2453-2457.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    Benjamin, W. H., Jr., K. H. Lok, R. Harris, N. Brook, L. Bond, D. Mulcahy, N. Robinson, V. Pruitt, D. P. Kirkpatrick, M. E. Kimerling, and N. E. Dunlap. 2001. Identification of a contaminating Mycobacterium tuberculosis strain with a transposition of an IS6110 insertion element resulting in an altered spoligotype. J. Clin. Microbiol.37:1092-1096.
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    Burman, W. J., R. R. Reves, A. P. Hawkes, C. A. Rietmeijer, Z. Yang, H. el-Hajj, J. H. Bates, and M. D. Cave. 1997. DNA fingerprinting with two probes decreases clustering of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.155:1140-1146.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. 7.↵
    Cave, M. D., K. D. Eisenach, G. Templeton, M. Salfinger, G. Mazurek, J. H. Bates, and J. T. Crawford. 1994. Stability of DNA fingerprint pattern produced with IS6110 in strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.32:262-266.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    Cole, S. T., R. Brosch, J. Parkhill, T. Garnier, C. Churcher, D. Harris, S. V. Gordon, K. Eiglmeier, S. Gas, C. E. Barry III, F. Tekaia, K. Badcock, D. Basham, D. Brown, T. Chillingworth, R. Connor, R. Davies, K. Devlin, T. Feltwell, S. Gentles, N. Hamlin, S. Holroyd, T. Hornsby, K. Jagels, A. Krogh, J. McLean, S. Moule, L. Murphy, K. Oliver, J. Osborne, M. A. Quail, M.-A. Rajandream, J. Rogers, S. Rutter, K. Seeger, J. Skelton, R. Squares, S. Squares, J. E. Sulston, K. Taylor, S. Whitehead, and B. G. Barrell. 1998. Deciphering the biology of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from the complete genome sequence. Nature393:537-544.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. 9.↵
    Cowan, L. S., L. Diem, T. Monson, P. Wand, D. Temporado, T. V. Oemig, and J. T. Crawford. 2005. Evaluation of a two-step approach for large scale, prospective genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates in the United States. J. Clin. Microbiol.43:668-695.
    OpenUrl
  10. 10.↵
    Dahle, U. R., P. Sandvenm, E. Heldal, and D. A. Caugant. 2003. Continued low rates of transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Norway. J. Clin. Microbiol.41:2968-2973.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    Drobniewski, F. A., A. Gibson, M. Ruddy, and M. D. Yates. 2003. Evaluation and utilization as a public health tool of a national molecular epidemiological tuberculosis outbreak database within the United Kingdom from 1997 to 2001. J. Clin. Microbiol.41:1861-1868.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    Fang, Z., and K. J. Forbes. 1997. A Mycobacterium tuberculosis IS6110 preferential locus (ipl) for insertion into the genome. J. Clin. Microbiol.35:479-481.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    Filliol, I., S. Ferdinand, L. Negroni, C. Sola, and N. Rastogi. 2000. Molecular typing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis based on variable number of tandem DNA repeats used alone and in association with spoligotyping. J. Clin. Microbiol.38:2520-2524.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    Fleischmann, R. D., D. Alland, J. A. Eisen, L. Carpenter, O. White, J. Peterson, R. DeBoy, R. Dodson, M. Gwinn, D. Haft, E. Hickey, J. F. Kolonay, W. C. Nelson, L. A. Umayam, M. Ermolaeva, S. L. Salzberg, A. Delcher, T. Utterback, J. Weidman, H. Khouri, J. Gill, A. Mikula, W. Bishai, W. R. Jacobs, Jr., J. C. Venter, and C. M. Fraser. 2002. Whole-genome comparison of Mycobacterium tuberculosis clinical and laboratory strains. J. Bacteriol.184:5479-5490.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    Frothingham, R., and W. A. Meeker-O'Connell. 1998. Genetic diversity in the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex based on variable numbers of tandem DNA repeats. Microbiology144:1189-1196.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  16. 16.↵
    Goguet de la Salmoniere, Y., H. M. Li, G. Torrea, A. Bunschoten, J. van Embden, and B. Gicquel. 1997. Evaluation of spoligotyping in a study of the transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.35:2210-2214.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    Goyal, M., N. A. Saunders, J. D. A. van Embden, D. B. Young, and R. J. Shaw. 1997. Differentiation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates by spoligotyping and IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism. J. Clin. Microbiol.35:647-651.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    Groathouse, N. A., B. Rivoire, B. H. Kim, H. Lee, S. Cho, P. J. Brennan, and V. L. Vissa. 2004. Multiple polymorphic loci for molecular typing of strains of Mycobacterium leprae. J. Clin. Microbiol.42:1666-1672.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    Hawkey, P. M., E. G. Smith, J. T. Evans, P. Monk, G. H. Bryan, H. Mohamed, M. Bardhan, and R. N. Pugh. 2003. Mycobacterial interspersed repetitive unit typing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis compared to IS6110-based restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis for investigation of apparently clustered cases of tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.41:3514-3520.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    Hunter, P. R., and M. A. Gaston. 1988. Numerical index of the discriminatory ability of typing systems and application of Simpson's index of diversity. J. Clin. Microbiol.26:2465-2466.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    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
  22. 22.↵
    Kremer, K., D. van Soolingen, R. Frothingham, W. H. Haas, P. W. Hermans, C. Martin, P. Palittapongarnpim, B. B. Plikaytis, L. W. Riley, M. A. Yakrus, J. M. Musser, and J. D. van Embden. 1999. Comparison of methods based on different molecular epidemiological markers for typing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex strains: interlaboratory study of discriminatory power and reproducibility. J. Clin. Microbiol.37:2607-2618.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    Kwara, A., R. Schiro, L. S. Cowan, N. E. Hyslop, M. F. Wiser, S. Roahen-Harrison, P. Kissinger, L. Diem, and J. T. Crawford. 2003. Evaluation of the epidemiologic utility of secondary typing methods for differentiation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates. J. Clin. Microbiol.41:2683-2685.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    Le Fleche, P., M. Fabre, F. Denoeud, J. L. Koeck, and G. Vergnaud. 27 November 2002, posting date. High resolution, on-line identification of strains from the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex based on tandem repeat typing. BMC Microbiol.2:37. [Online.] http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2180/2/37 .
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    Mazars, E., S. Lesjean, A. Banuls, M. Gilbert, V. Vincent, B. Gicquel, M. Tibayrenc, C. Locht, and P. Supply. 2001. High resolution minisatelitte-based typing as a portable approach to global analysis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis molecular epidemiology. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA98:1901-1906.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    Nguyen, D., P. Brassard, D. Menzies, L. Thilbert, R. Warren, S. Mostowy, and M. Behr. 2004. Genomic characterization of an endemic Mycobacterium tuberculosis strain: evolutionary and epidemiologic implications. J. Clin. Microbiol.42:2573-2580.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    Niemann, S., E. Richter, and S. Rusch-Gerdes. 1999. Stability of Mycobacterium tuberculosis IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism patterns and spoligotypes determined by analyzing serial isolates from patients with drug-resistant tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.37:409-412.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    Niobe-Eyangoh, S. N., C. Kuaban, P. Sorlin, J. Thonnon, V. Vincent, and M. C. Gutierrez. 2004. Molecular characteristics of strains of the Cameroon family, the major group of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in a country with a high prevalence of tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.42:5029-5035.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    Otal, I., C. Martin, V. Vincent-Levy-Frebault, D. Thierry, and B. Gicquel. 1991. Restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis using IS6110 as an epidemiological marker in tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.29:1252-1254.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    Roring, S., A. Scott, D. Brittain, I. Walker, G. Hewinson, S. Neill, and R. Skuce. 2002. Development of variable-number tandem repeat typing of Mycobacterium bovis: comparison of results with those obtained by using existing exact tandem repeats and spoligotyping. J. Clin. Microbiol.40:2126-2133.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. 31.↵
    Sampson, S. L., M. Richardson, P. D. Van Helden, and R. M. Warren. 2004. IS6110-mediated deletion polymorphism in isogenic strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.42:895-898.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    Savine, E., R. M. Warren, G. D. van der Spuy, N. Beyers, P. D. van Helden, C. Locht, and P. Supply. 2002. Stability of variable-number tandem repeats of mycobacterial interspersed repetitive units from 12 loci in serial isolates of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.40:4561-4566.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    Seidler, A., A. Nienhaus, and R. Diel. 2004. The transmission of tuberculosis in the light of new molecular biological approaches. Occup. Environ. Med.61:96-102.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. 34.↵
    Shamputa, I. C., L. Rigouts, L. A. Eyongeta, N. A. El Aila, A. van Deun, A. H. Salim, E. Willery, C. Locht, P. Supply, and F. Portaels. 2004. Genotypic and phenotypic heterogeneity among Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates from pulmonary tuberculosis patients. J. Clin. Microbiol.42:5528-5536.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. 35.↵
    Skuce, R. A., T. P. McCorry, J. F. McCarroll, S. M. Roring, A. N. Scott, D. Brittain, S. L. Hughes, R. G. Hewinson, and S. D. Neill. 2002. Discrimination of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex bacteria using novel VNTR-PCR targets. Microbiology148:519-528.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  36. 36.↵
    Spurgiesz, R. S., T. N. Quitugua, K. L. Smith, J. Schupp, E. G. Palmer, R. A. Cox, and P. Keim. 2003. Molecular typing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis by using nine novel variable-number tandem repeats across the Beijing family and low-copy-number IS6110 isolates. J. Clin. Microbiol.41:4224-4230.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    Supply, P., S. Lesjean, E. Savine, K. Kremer, D. van Soolingen, and C. Locht. 2001. Automated high-throughput genotyping for study of global epidemiology of Mycobacterium tuberculosis based on mycobacterial interspersed repetitive units. J. Clin. Microbiol.39:3563-3571.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    van der Spuy, G. D., R. M. Warren, M. Richardson, N. Beyers, M. A. Behr, and P. D. van Helden. 2003. Use of genetic distance as a measure of ongoing transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.41:5640-5644.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. 39.↵
    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, and P. M. Small. 1993. Strain identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis by DNA fingerprinting: recommendations for a standardized methodology. J. Clin. Microbiol.31:406-409.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    van Soolingen, D., P. W. M. Hermans, P. E. W. de Haas, D. R. Soll, and J. D. A. van Embden. 1991. Occurrence and stability of insertion sequences in Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex strains: evaluation of an insertion sequence-dependent DNA polymorphism as a tool in the epidemiology of tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.29:2578-2586.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. 41.↵
    van Soolingen, D. 2001. Molecular epidemiology of tuberculosis and other mycobacterial infections: main methodologies and achievements. J. Intern. Med.249:1-26.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  42. 42.↵
    Wall, S., K. Ghanekar, J. McFadden, and J. W. Dale. 1999. Context-sensitive transposition of IS6110 in mycobacteria. Microbiology145:3169-3176.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  43. 43.↵
    Warren, R. M., G. D. van der Spuy, M. Richardson, N. Beyers, C. Booysen, M. A. Behr, and P. D. van Helden. 2002. Evolution of the IS6110-based restriction fragment length polymorphism pattern during the transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.40:1277-1282.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    Yates, M. D., F. A. Drobniewski, and S. M. Wilson. 2002. Evaluation of a rapid PCR-based epidemiological typing method for routine studies of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J. Clin. Microbiol.40:712-714.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Progression Toward an Improved DNA Amplification-Based Typing Technique in the Study of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Epidemiology
Krishna K. Gopaul, Timothy J. Brown, Andrea L. Gibson, Malcolm D. Yates, Francis A. Drobniewski
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Jul 2006, 44 (7) 2492-2498; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01428-05

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.
Progression Toward an Improved DNA Amplification-Based Typing Technique in the Study of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Epidemiology
(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
Progression Toward an Improved DNA Amplification-Based Typing Technique in the Study of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Epidemiology
Krishna K. Gopaul, Timothy J. Brown, Andrea L. Gibson, Malcolm D. Yates, Francis A. Drobniewski
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Jul 2006, 44 (7) 2492-2498; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01428-05
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Bacterial Typing Techniques
molecular epidemiology
Mycobacterium tuberculosis
Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques
tuberculosis

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