Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18716230›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2008

Discordance between mycobacterial interspersed repetitive-unit-variable-number tandem-repeat typing and IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism genotyping for analysis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis Beijing strains in a setting of high incidence of tuberculosis.

M Hanekom, G D van der Spuy, N C Gey van Pittius, C R E McEvoy, K G P Hoek, S L Ndabambi, A M Jordaan, T C Victor, P D van Helden, R M Warren

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. A comparative analysis of molecular genotypes ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

M HanekomDivision of Molecular Biology and Human Genetics, Faculty of Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, P.O. Box 19063, Tygerberg, South Africa 7505.
G D van der Spuy
N C Gey van Pittius
C R E McEvoy
K G P Hoek
S L Ndabambi
A M Jordaan
T C Victor
P D van Helden
R M Warren
Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology · INStellenbosch University · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) genotyping is the most widely used genotyping method to study the epidemiology of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. However, due to the complexity of the IS6110 RFLP genotyping technique, and the interpretation of RFLP data, mycobacterial interspersed repetitive-unit-variable-number tandem-repeat (MIRU-VNTR) genotyping has been proposed as the new genotyping standard. This study aimed to determine the discriminatory power of different MIRU-VNTR locus combinations relative to IS6110 RFLP genotyping, using a collection of Beijing genotype M. tuberculosis strains with a well-established phylogenetic history. Clustering, diversity index, clustering concordance, concordance among unique genotypes, and divergent and convergent evolution were calculated for seven combinations of 27 different MIRU-VNTR loci and compared to IS6110 RFLP results. Our results confirmed previous findings that MIRU-VNTR genotyping can be used to estimate the extent of recent or ongoing transmission. However, molecular epidemiological linking of cases varied significantly depending on the genotyping method used. We conclude that IS6110 RFLP and MIRU-VNTR loci evolve independently and at different rates, which leads to discordance between transmission chains predicted by the respective genotyping methods. Concordance between the two genotyping methods could be improved by the inclusion of genetic distance (GD) into the clustering formulae for some of the MIRU-VNTR loci combinations. In summary, our findings differ from previous reports, which may be explained by the fact that in settings of low tuberculosis incidence, the genetic distance between epidemiologically unrelated isolates was sufficient to define a strain using either marker, whereas in settings of high incidence, continuous evolution and persistence of strains revealed the weaknesses inherent to these markers.

Indexed as

Bacterial Typing TechniquesDNA Transposable ElementsInterspersed Repetitive SequencesPolymorphism, Restriction Fragment LengthCluster AnalysisDNA, BacterialDNA FingerprintingEvolution, MolecularGenotypeHumansMolecular EpidemiologyMycobacterium tuberculosisSensitivity and SpecificityTuberculosisDNA, BacterialDNA Transposable Elements

Identifiers

PMID18716230
PMCPMC2566133
OpenAlexW2166346373

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.