Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
1.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 30(3): 560-563, 2024 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38407162

RESUMO

Analysis of genome sequencing data from >100,000 genomes of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex using TB-Annotator software revealed a previously unknown lineage, proposed name L10, in central Africa. Phylogenetic reconstruction suggests L10 could represent a missing link in the evolutionary and geographic migration histories of M. africanum.


Assuntos
Evolução Biológica , Mycobacterium , Filogenia , Mycobacterium/genética , Software , África Central/epidemiologia
2.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis ; 109(2): 116249, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38537504

RESUMO

Targeted Next Generation Sequencing (tNGS) and Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) are increasingly used for genotypic drug susceptibility testing (gDST) of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Thirty-two multi-drugs resistant and 40 drug susceptible isolates from Madagascar were tested with Deeplex® Myc-TB and WGS using the Mykrobe analysis pipeline. Sixty-four of 72 (89 %) yielded concordant categorical gDST results for drugs tested by both assays. Mykrobe didn't detect pncA K96T, pncA Q141P, pncA H51P, pncA H82R, rrs C517T and rpsL K43R mutations, which were identified as minority variants in corresponding isolates by tNGS. One discrepancy (rrs C517T) was associated with insufficient sequencing depth on WGS. Deeplex® Myc-TB didn't detect inhA G-154A which isn't covered by the assay's amplification targets. Despite those targets being included in the Deeplex® Myc-TB assay, a pncA T47A and a deletion in gid were not identified in one isolate respectively. The evaluated WGS and tNGS gDST assays show high but imperfect concordance.


Assuntos
Antituberculosos , Genótipo , Sequenciamento de Nucleotídeos em Larga Escala , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana , Mycobacterium tuberculosis , Tuberculose Resistente a Múltiplos Medicamentos , Sequenciamento Completo do Genoma , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/genética , Mycobacterium tuberculosis/efeitos dos fármacos , Antituberculosos/farmacologia , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana/métodos , Humanos , Sequenciamento de Nucleotídeos em Larga Escala/métodos , Tuberculose Resistente a Múltiplos Medicamentos/microbiologia , Farmacorresistência Bacteriana Múltipla/genética , Madagáscar , Genoma Bacteriano/genética , Mutação , Proteínas de Bactérias/genética , Técnicas de Genotipagem/métodos
3.
Lancet Glob Health ; 12(6): e1017-e1026, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38762282

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) using single-dose rifampicin reduces progression from infection with Mycobacterium leprae to leprosy disease. We compared effectiveness of different administration modalities, using a higher (20 mg/kg) dose of rifampicin-single double-dose rifampicin (SDDR)-PEP. METHODS: We did a cluster randomised study in 16 villages in Madagascar and 48 villages in Comoros. Villages were randomly assigned to four study arms and inhabitants were screened once a year for leprosy, for 4 consecutive years. All permanent residents (no age restriction) were eligible to participate and all identified patients with leprosy were treated with multidrug therapy (SDDR-PEP was provided to asymptomatic contacts aged ≥2 years). Arm 1 was the comparator arm, in which no PEP was provided. In arm 2, SDDR-PEP was provided to household contacts of patients with leprosy, whereas arm 3 extended SDDR-PEP to anyone living within 100 m. In arm 4, SDDR-PEP was offered to household contacts and to anyone living within 100 m and testing positive to anti-phenolic glycolipid-I. The main outcome was the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of leprosy between the comparator arm and each of the intervention arms. We also assessed the individual protective effect of SDDR-PEP and explored spatial associations. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03662022, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Jan 11, 2019, and Jan 16, 2023, we enrolled 109 436 individuals, of whom 95 762 had evaluable follow-up data. Our primary analysis showed a non-significant reduction in leprosy incidence in arm 2 (IRR 0·95), arm 3 (IRR 0·80), and arm 4 (IRR 0·58). After controlling for baseline prevalence, the reduction in arm 3 became stronger and significant (IRR 0·56, p=0·0030). At an individual level SDDR-PEP was also protective with an IRR of 0·55 (p=0·0050). Risk of leprosy was two to four times higher for those living within 75 m of an index patient at baseline. INTERPRETATION: SDDR-PEP appears to protect against leprosy but less than anticipated. Strong spatial associations were observed within 75 m of index patients. Targeted door-to-door screening around index patients complemented by a blanket SDDR-PEP approach will probably have a substantial effect on transmission. FUNDING: European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.


Assuntos
Hansenostáticos , Hanseníase , Profilaxia Pós-Exposição , Rifampina , Humanos , Hanseníase/prevenção & controle , Hanseníase/tratamento farmacológico , Hanseníase/epidemiologia , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Rifampina/administração & dosagem , Rifampina/uso terapêutico , Hansenostáticos/uso terapêutico , Hansenostáticos/administração & dosagem , Profilaxia Pós-Exposição/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adolescente , Adulto Jovem , Madagáscar/epidemiologia , Criança , Análise por Conglomerados , Incidência , Mycobacterium leprae
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa