Analysis and comparative study on the virulence of several drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-6621.2021.09.016

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the virulence of clinical drug-resistant isolates and laboratory induced drug-resistant strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB). Methods MTB standard strain H37Rv and attenuated strain H37Ra, four clinical drug-resistant isolates (15833, 16030, 17080 and 30744) and eight laboratory induced drug-resistant strains, including one pretomanid(PA-824)resistant strain (P1), one Lzd resistant strain (L1), three PBTZ-169 resistant strain (169-1, 169-2, 169-3), three PA-824 and Lzd dual resistant strains (PL1, PL2, PL3), were selected. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of clinical drug-resistant isolates against first-line and second-line anti-tuberculosis drugs and laboratory induced drug-resistant strains against Lzd, PA-824 and PBTZ-169 were measured. The in vitro growth curves of the studied strains and the intracellular colony forming units (CFU) of macrophages 2 days after infection were drawn, and the content of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) released by macrophages 2 days after infection was measured.One hundred and sixty-eight BALB/c mice, 6-7 weeks old and 16-18 g/mouse, were randomly divided into 14 groups with 12 mice in each group. BALB/c mice were infected with drug-resistant strains by tail vein injection. The half survival time of mice was recorded and analyzed. Results In vitro experiments showed that the plateau phase of growth curve of MTB clinical drug-resistant isolate 30744 was earlier than that of the other drug-resistant strains, the adaptability of the strain in vitro was lower, and the growth curve trend of the other drug-resistant strains was basically identical. The intracellular CFU counts of clinical drug resistant isolates (15833, 16030, 30744, 17080) and laboratory induced drug resistant strains (PL1, PL2, PL3) resistant to Lzd and PA-824 were (5.180±0.074), (5.571±0.029), (5.550±0.073), (5.446±0.099), (5.763±0.197), (5.907±0.053), and (5.661±0.083) log₁₀ CFU/ml, which was significantly lower than that of standard strain H37Rv ((6.207 ± 0.028) log₁₀ CFU/ml), and the difference was statistically significant (t=17.932, 12.758, 12.034, 10.241, 4.796, 7.042, 9.113, Ps<0.05). In addition, the absorbance A₄₉₀ values of LDH release from macrophages infected by strains 15833, 16030, 30744, 1708, P1, L1, PL1, PL2, PL3, 169-1, 169-2 and 169-3 were 0.252±0.039, 0.412±0.078, 0.247±0.022, 0.358±0.054, 0.329±0.015, 0.483±0.017, 0.328±0.046, 0.455±0.075, 0.283±0.041, 0.258±0.044, 0.374±0.080, and 0.311±0.097, which was significantly lower than that of standard strain H37Rv (0.958±0.025), and the difference was statistically significant (t=27.269, 16.788, 38.244, 24.238, 44.005, 32.698, 27.713, 15.171, 31.798, 31.472, 16.515, 15.570, Ps<0.01). In vivo virulence test showed that: (1) The half surviors’ alive time (≥15 days) of all strains infected mice was significantly longer than that of H37Rv (12 days). (2) The survival curve of mice showed that the survival time of mice infected with pre-XDR strain was longer than that of MDR strains, namely 30744>17080>16030>15833; (3)The survival time of mice in the dual drug-resistant strain LPDR group>PBTZ-169 drug-resistant strain group=single Lzd resistant group>single PA-824 resistant strain group. Conclusion The virulence of MTB resistant strains was lower than that of wild-type standard strains, and the virulence might be negatively correlated with the number of drug-resistance.

Key words: Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Virulence, Survival analysis, Evaluation studies

ZHOU Ying-yu, FU Lei, ZHANG Wei-yan, WANG Bin, CHEN Xi, LU Yu, CHEN Xiao-you. Analysis and comparative study on the virulence of several drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis[J]. Chinese Journal of Antituberculosis, 2021, 43(9): 952-960. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6621.2021.09.016

Figures/Tables 14

菌株种类	CFU计数 (log₁₀CFU/ml, $x ¯$ ±s)	t值	P值
H37Rv	6.207±0.028	-	-
L1	6.134±0.057	-1.506	0.207
P2	6.125±0.095	1.144	0.316
PL1	5.763±0.197	4.796	0.009
PL2	5.907±0.053	7.042	0.020
PL3	5.661±0.083	9.113	0.001
169-1	5.800±0.385	1.501	0.271
169-2	5.933±0.221	1.710	0.225
169-3	5.938±0.147	2.541	0.064
15833	5.180±0.074	17.932	<0.01
16030	5.571±0.029	12.758	<0.01
30744	5.550±0.073	12.034	<0.01
17080	5.446±0.099	10.241	0.001
H37Ra	4.634±0.286	7.715	0.020

菌株种类	吸光度值(A₄₉₀) 比值( $x ¯$ ±s)	t值	P值
H37Rv	0.958±0.025	-	-
L1	0.329±0.015	44.005	<0.01
P2	0.483±0.017	32.698	<0.01
PL1	0.328±0.046	27.713	<0.01
PL2	0.455±0.075	15.171	<0.01
PL3	0.283±0.041	31.798	<0.01
169-1	0.258±0.044	31.472	<0.01
169-2	0.374±0.080	16.515	<0.01
169-3	0.311±0.097	15.570	<0.01
15833	0.252±0.039	27.269	<0.01
16030	0.412±0.078	16.788	<0.01
30744	0.247±0.022	38.244	<0.01
17080	0.358±0.054	24.238	<0.01
H37Ra	0.233±0.009	54.247	<0.01

References 30

[1]	World Health Organization. Global tuberculosis report 2020. Geneva:World Health Organization, 2020.
[2]	Patel R. Biofilms and antimicrobial resistance. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2005,(437):41-47. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000175714.68624.74. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000175714.68624.74
[3]	Seral C, Van Bambeke F, Tulkens PM. Quantitative analysis of gentamicin, azithromycin, telithromycin, ciprofloxacin, moxifloxacin, and oritavancin (LY333328) activities against intracellular Staphylococcus aureus in mouse J774 macrophages. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2003, 47(7):2283-2292. doi: 10.1128/aac.47.7.2283-2292.2003. doi: 10.1128/aac.47.7.2283-2292.2003 URL
[4]	Martinot AJ, Blass E, Yu J, et al. Protective efficacy of an attenuated Mtb ΔLprG vaccine in mice. PLoS Pathogens, 2020, 16(12):e1009096. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1009096. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1009096 pmid: 33315936
[5]	刘毅, 张亚莉, 张旭霞, 等. 结核分枝杆菌感染和免疫逃逸机制研究进展. 中华微生物学和免疫学杂志, 2015, 35(5):398-400. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-5101.2015.05.015. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-5101.2015.05.015
[6]	Lye DC, Earnest A, Ling ML, et al. The impact of multidrug resistance in healthcare-associated and nosocomial Gram-negative bacteraemia on mortality and length of stay: cohort study. Clin Microbiol Infect, 2012, 18(5):502-508. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03606.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03606.x URL
[7]	Pym AS, Saint-Joanis B, Cole ST. Effect of katG Mutations on the Virulence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and the Implication for Transmission in Humans. Infect Immun, 2002, 70(9):4955-4960. doi: 10.1128/IAI.70.9.4955-4960.2002. doi: 10.1128/IAI.70.9.4955-4960.2002 URL
[8]	胡明豪, 徐建, 王彬, 等. 结核分枝杆菌对PA-824耐药的体外诱导及稳定性研究. 中国抗生素杂志, 2017, 42(2):144-148. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8689.2017.02.012. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8689.2017.02.012
[9]	Butler RE, Brodin P, Jang J, et al. The balance of apoptotic and necrotic cell death in Mycobacterium tuberculosis infected macrophages is not dependent on bacterial virulence. PLoS One, 2012, 7(10):e47573. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047573. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047573 URL
[10]	Danelishvili L, McGarvey J, Li YJ, et al. Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection causes different levels of apoptosis and necrosis in human macrophages and alveolar epithelial cells. Cell Microbiol, 2003, 5(9):649-660. doi: 10.1046/j.1462-5822.2003.00312.x. doi: 10.1046/j.1462-5822.2003.00312.x pmid: 12925134
[11]	Pedroza-Roldán C, Marquina-Castillo B, Mata-Espinosa D, et al. BCG constitutively expressing the adenylyl cyclase encoded by Rv2212 increases its immunogenicity and reduces replication of M.tuberculosis in lungs of BALB/c mice. Tuberculosis (Edinb), 2018, 113:19-25. doi: 10.1016/j.tube.2018.08.012. doi: 10.1016/j.tube.2018.08.012 URL
[12]	Derrick SC, Yang AL, Morris SL. A polyvalent DNA vaccine expressing an ESAT6-Ag85B fusion protein protects mice against a primary infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis and boosts BCG-induced protective immunity. Vaccine, 2004, 23(6):780-788. pmid: 15542202
[13]	Miotto P, Zhang Y, Cirillo DM, et al. Drug resistance mechanisms and drug susceptibility testing for tuberculosis. Respirology, 2018, 23(12):1098-1113. doi: 10.1111/resp.13393. doi: 10.1111/resp.13393 pmid: 30189463
[14]	Takayama K, Wang C, Besra GS. Pathway to synthesis and processing of mycolic acids in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Clin Microbiol Rev, 2005, 18(1):81-101. doi: 10.1128/CMR.18.1.81-101.2005. doi: 10.1128/CMR.18.1.81-101.2005 pmid: 15653820
[15]	Manganelli R, Provvedi R, Rodrigue S, et al. Sigma factors and global gene regulation in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J Bacteriol, 2004, 186(4):895-902. doi: 10.1128/jb.186.4.895-902.2004. doi: 10.1128/JB.186.4.895-902.2004 pmid: 14761983
[16]	Gagneux S, Long CD, Small PM, et al. The competitive cost of antibiotic resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Science, 2006, 312(5782):1944-1946. doi: 10.1126/science.1124410. doi: 10.1126/science.1124410 URL
[17]	Pym AS, Saint-Joanis B, Cole ST. Effect of katG mutations on the virulence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and the implication for transmission in humans. Infect Immun, 2002, 70(9):4955-4960. doi: 10.1128/iai.70.9.4955-4960.2002. doi: 10.1128/iai.70.9.4955-4960.2002 URL
[18]	Cohen T, Becerra MC, Murray MB. Isoniazid resistance and the future of drug-resistant tuberculosis. Microb Drug Resist, 2004, 10(4):280-285. doi: 10.1089/mdr.2004.10.280. doi: 10.1089/mdr.2004.10.280 pmid: 15650371
[19]	Casali N, Nikolayevskyy V, Balabanova Y, et al. Evolution and transmission of drug-resistant tuberculosis in a Russian population. Nat Genet, 2014, 46(3):279-286. doi: 10.1038/ng.2878. doi: 10.1038/ng.2878 URL
[20]	de Vos M, Müller B, Borrell S, et al. Putative compensatory mutations in the rpoC gene of rifampin-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis are associated with ongoing transmission. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2013, 57(2):827-832. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01541-12. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01541-12 pmid: 23208709
[21]	Comas I, Borrell S, Roetzer A, et al. Whole-genome sequencing of rifampicin-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains identifies compensatory mutations in RNA polymerase genes. Nat Genet, 2011, 44(1):106-110. doi: 10.1038/ng.1038. doi: 10.1038/ng.1038 URL
[22]	Dey R, Nandi S, Samadder A, et al. Exploring the Potential Inhibition of Candidate Drug Molecules for Clinical Investigation Based on their Docking or Crystallographic Analyses against M.tuberculosis Enzyme Targets. Curr Top Med Chem, 2020, 20(29):2662-2680. doi: 10.2174/1568026620666200903163921. doi: 10.2174/1568026620666200903163921 URL
[23]	Briffotaux J, Huang W, Wang X, et al. MmpS5/MmpL5 as an efflux pump in Mycobacterium species. Tuberculosis (Edinb), 2017, 107:13-19. doi: 10.1016/j.tube.2017.08.001. doi: 10.1016/j.tube.2017.08.001 URL
[24]	Dookie N, Rambaran S, Padayatchi N, et al. Evolution of drug resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a review on the molecular determinants of resistance and implications for personalized care. J Antimicrob Chemother, 2018, 73(5):1138-1151. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkx506. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkx506 URL
[25]	Weinreich DM, Watson RA, Chao L. Perspective: Sign epistasis and genetic constraint on evolutionary trajectories. Evolution, 2005, 59(6):1165-1174. pmid: 16050094
[26]	Zur WP, Kouyos R, Engelstädter J, et al. Population biological principles of drug-resistance evolution in infectious diseases. Lancet Infect Dis, 2011, 11(3):236-247. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(10)70264-4. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(10)70264-4 URL
[27]	Pieters J. Mycobacterium tuberculosis and the macrophage: maintaining a balance. Cell Host Microbe, 2008, 3(6):399-407. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2008.05.006. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2008.05.006 pmid: 18541216
[28]	Collins DM. In search of tuberculosis virulence genes. Trends Microbiol, 1996, 4(11):426-430. doi: 10.1016/0966-842x(96)10066-4. doi: 10.1016/0966-842x(96)10066-4 pmid: 8950811
[29]	Lee JH, Ammerman NC, Nolan S, et al. Isoniazid resistance without a loss of fitness in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Nat Commun, 2012, 3:753. doi: 10.1038/ncomms1724. doi: 10.1038/ncomms1724 URL
[30]	Danelishvili L, McGarvey J, Li YJ, et al. Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection causes different levels of apoptosis and necrosis in human macrophages and alveolar epithelial cells. Cell Microbiol, 2003, 5(9):649-660. doi: 10.1046/j.1462-5822.2003.00312.x. doi: 10.1046/j.1462-5822.2003.00312.x pmid: 12925134

菌株	耐药类型	INH	RFP	EMB	Sm	Km	Mfx	Lfx
H37Rv	-	0.09	0.01	1.82	0.06	0.73	0.05	0.12
15833	耐多药	>6.80^a	>17.00^a	1.02	0.08	0.34	0.03	0.03
16030	耐多药	>6.80^a	>17.00^a	6.21^a	0.16	2.56	0.03	0.06
17080	准广泛耐药	>6.80^a	>17.00^a	25.32^a	24.7^a	0.34	0.61	3.34^a
30744	准广泛耐药	>6.80^a	>17.00^a	7.00^a	31.9^a	22.03^a	0.03	0.18

菌株	耐药类型	Lzd(μg/ml)	PA-824(μg/ml)	PBTZ-169(ng/ml)
H37Rv	-	0.25	0.07	0.31
H37Ra	-	0.06	0.03	0.22
L1	单耐Lzd	13.59^a	0.15	-
P1	单耐PA-824	0.22	>20.00^a	-
PL1	同时耐Lzd和PA-824	12.37^a	>20.00^a	-
PL2	同时耐Lzd和PA-824	10.93^a	>20.00^a	-
PL3	同时耐Lzd和PA-824	8.51^a	>20.00^a	-
169-1	单耐PBTZ-169	-	-	6.11^a
169-2	单耐PBTZ-169	-	-	>400.00^a
169-3	单耐PBTZ-169	-	-	>400.00^a

菌株	第0天	第3天	第7天	第14天	第21天	第28天
H37Rv	5.148±0.121	6.856±0.084	6.675±0.065	7.044±0.264	7.370±0.142	7.256±0.113
H37Ra	5.090±0.079	6.556±0.126	6.439±0.239	6.694±0.058	7.027±0.046	7.137±0.221
L1	5.029±0.011	6.077±0.031	6.854±0.072	7.118±0.035	7.233±0.021	7.011±0.161
P1	5.128±0.070	5.671±0.093	6.826±0.090	7.016±0.039	7.221±0.026	7.255±0.037
PL1	5.039±0.036	5.951±0.024	7.019±0.026	7.113±0.024	7.155±0.043	7.260±0.074
PL2	5.008±0.030	6.259±0.027	7.159±0.068	7.103±0.009	7.423±0.002	7.212±0.085
PL3	5.018±0.240	6.223±0.037	6.892±0.087	6.841±0.044	7.126±0.026	7.430±0.126
169-1	5.013±0.039	6.503±0.175	6.969±0.276	7.190±0.082	7.783±0.147	7.287±0.081
169-2	5.079±0.115	6.598±0.069	6.826±0.127	7.015±0.065	7.537±0.168	7.327±0.261
169-3	5.227±0.077	6.865±0.174	7.024±0.082	6.948±0.059	7.483±0.072	7.270±0.201
15833	5.112±0.097	6.207±0.019	6.998±0.069	7.328±0.073	7.530±0.078	7.470±0.115
16030	5.363±0.044	6.146±0.036	7.243±0.038	7.428±0.036	7.429±0.062	7.183±0.154
17080	5.502±0.394	6.361±0.019	7.125±0.020	7.409±0.038	7.709±0.142	7.223±0.386
30744	5.246±0.205	6.411±0.108	6.243±0.074	6.548±0.103	6.663±0.230	6.660±0.104

组别	15833		16030		30744		17080
组别	χ²值	P值	χ²值	P值	χ²值	P值	χ²值	P值
H37Rv	25.721	0.000	25.721	0.000	25.721	0.000	22.208	0.000
H37Ra	26.767	0.000	26.134	0.000	14.488	0.000	25.545	0.000
15833	-	-	1.185	0.276	22.557	0.000	7.704	0.006
16030	1.185	0.276	-	-	25.011	0.000	8.974	0.003
30744	22.557	0.000	25.011	0.000	-	-	11.240	0.001
17080	7.704	0.006	8.974	0.003	11.240	0.001	-	-

组别	L1		P1		PL1		PL2		PL3		169-1		169-2		169-3
组别	χ²值	P值	χ²值	P值	χ²值	P值	χ²值	P值	χ²值	P值	χ²值	P值	χ²值	P值	χ²值	P值
H37Rv	25.721	0.000	4.602	0.032	25.721	0.000	21.149	0.000	25.721	0.000	25.721	0.000	25.721	0.000	23.868	0.000
H37Ra	27.212	0.000	26.103	0.000	5.223	0.022	26.769	0.000	7.703	0.006	27.039	0.000	17.607	0.000	26.145	0.000
L1	-	-	14.175	0.000	15.402	0.000	0.002	0.963	15.098	0.000	0.439	0.507	2.144	0.143	0.484	0.487
P1	14.175	0.000	-	-	26.103	0.000	15.980	0.000	26.103	0.000	18.040	0.000	17.070	0.000	14.357	0.000
PL1	15.402	0.000	26.103	0.000	-	-	21.881	0.000	0.192	0.661	16.684	0.000	6.905	0.009	26.145	0.000
PL2	0.002	0.963	15.980	0.000	21.881	0.000	-	-	19.102	0.000	0.208	0.648	1.475	0.225	4.356	0.037
PL3	15.098	0.000	26.103	0.000	0.192	0.661	19.102	0.000	-	-	16.830	0.000	5.352	0.021	23.622	0.000
169-1	0.439	0.507	18.040	0.000	16.684	0.000	0.208	0.648	16.830	0.000	-	-	1.145	0.285	1.672	0.196
169-2	2.144	0.143	17.070	0.000	6.905	0.009	1.475	0.225	5.352	0.021	1.145	0.285	-	-	3.600	0.058
169-3	0.484	0.487	14.357	0.000	26.145	0.000	4.356	0.037	23.622	0.000	1.672	0.196	3.600	0.058	-	-