ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2016
rRNA Operon Copy Number Can Explain the Distinct Epidemiology of Hospital-Associated Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus.
Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parallel evolution of linezolid-resistantMicrobiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Parallel Evolution of Linezolid ResistantbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Effect of Er,Cr:YSGG laser with a side-firing tip on decontamination of titanium disc surface: an in vitro and in vivo study.International journal of implant dentistry · 2023Article
- Impact ofEvolution letters · 2022Article
- Macrolide Resistance andmSphere · 2022Article
- Antibiotic Exposure Leads to Reduced Phage Susceptibility in Vancomycin Intermediate Staphylococcus aureus (VISA).Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2022Article
- Article
- Emergence and Within-Host Genetic Evolution of Methicillin-ResistantAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2018Article
- Deletion of One 23S rRNA Gene (Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The distinct epidemiology of original hospital-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (HA-MRSA) and early community-associated MRSA (CA-MRSA) is largely unexplained. S. aureus carries either five or six rRNA operon copies. Evidence is provided for a scenario in which MRSA has adapted to the hospital environment by rRNA operon loss (six to five copies) due to antibiotic pressure. Early CA-MRSA, in contrast, results from wild-type methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) that acquired mecA without loss of an rRNA operon. Of the HA-MRSA isolates (n = 77), 67.5% had five rRNA operon copies, compared to 23.2% of the CA-MRSA isolates (n = 69) and 7.7% of MSSA isolates (n = 195) (P < 0.001). In addition, 105 MSSA isolates from cystic fibrosis patients were tested, because these patients are repeatedly treated with antibiotics; 32.4% of these isolates had five rRNA operon copies. For all subsets, a correlation between resistance profile and rRNA copy number was found. Furthermore, we showed that in vitro antibiotic pressure may result in rRNA operon copy loss. We also showed that without antibiotic pressure, S. aureus isolates containing six rRNA copies are more fit than isolates with five copies. We conclude that HA-MRSA and cystic fibrosis isolates most likely have adapted to an environment with high antibiotic pressure by the loss of an rRNA operon copy. This loss has facilitated resistance development, which promoted survival in these niches. However, strain fitness decreased, which explains their lack of success in the community. In contrast, CA-MRSA isolates retained six rRNA operon copies, rendering them fitter and thereby able to survive and spread in the community.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.