ArticlePloS one2023
A Bayesian approach to estimate the probability of resistance to bedaquiline in the presence of a genomic variant.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigation of bedaquiline heteroresistance amongMicrobiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Impact of bedaquiline resistance probability on treatment decision for rifampicin-resistant TB.IJTLD open · 2024Article
- Bedaquiline resistance probability to guide treatment decision making for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis: insights from a qualitative study.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBedaquiline is a core drug for treatment of rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis. Few genomic variants have been statistically associated with bedaquiline resistance. Alternative approaches for determining the genotypic-phenotypic association are needed to guide clinical care.
methodsUsing published phenotype data for variants in Rv0678, atpE, pepQ and Rv1979c genes in 756 Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates and survey data of the opinion of 33 experts, we applied Bayesian methods to estimate the posterior probability of bedaquiline resistance and corresponding 95% credible intervals.
resultsExperts agreed on the role of Rv0678, and atpE, were uncertain about the role of pepQ and Rv1979c variants and overestimated the probability of bedaquiline resistance for most variant types, resulting in lower posterior probabilities compared to prior estimates. The posterior median probability of bedaquiline resistance was low for synonymous mutations in atpE (0.1%) and Rv0678 (3.3%), high for missense mutations in atpE (60.8%) and nonsense mutations in Rv0678 (55.1%), relatively low for missense (31.5%) mutations and frameshift (30.0%) in Rv0678 and low for missense mutations in pepQ (2.6%) and Rv1979c (2.9%), but 95% credible intervals were wide.
conclusionsBayesian probability estimates of bedaquiline resistance given the presence of a specific mutation could be useful for clinical decision-making as it presents interpretable probabilities compared to standard odds ratios. For a newly emerging variant, the probability of resistance for the variant type and gene can still be used to guide clinical decision-making. Future studies should investigate the feasibility of using Bayesian probabilities for bedaquiline resistance in clinical practice.
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.