Evidence Hub

Infection by a multidrug-resistant Corynebacterium diphtheriae strain: prediction of virulence factors, CRISPR-Cas system analysis, and structural implications of mutations conferring rifampin resistance

Araújo MRB, Prates FD, Ramos JN, Sousa EG, Bokermann S, Sacchi CT, de Mattos-Guaraldi AL, Campos KR et al.

Functional & integrative genomics, 2024

4 citations

Abstract

Cases of diphtheria, even in immunized individuals, are still reported in several parts of the world, including in Brazil. New outbreaks occur in Europe and other continents. In this context, studies on Corynebacterium diphtheriae infections are highly relevant, both for a better understanding of the pathogenesis of the disease and for controlling the circulation of clones and antimicrobial resistance genes. Here we present a case of cutaneous infection by multidrug-resistant Corynebacterium diphtheriae and provide its whole-genome sequencing. Genomic analysis revealed resistance genes, including tet(W), sul1, cmx, rpoB2, rbpA and mutation in rpoB. We performed phylogenetic analyzes and used the BRIG to compare the predicted resistance genes with those found in genomes from other significant isolates, including those associated with some outbreaks. Virulence factors such as spaD, srtBC, spaH, srtDE, surface-anchored pilus proteins (sapD), nonfimbrial adhesins (DIP0733, DIP1281, and DIP1621), embC and mptC (putatively involved in CdiLAM), sigA, dtxR and MdbA (putatively involved) in post-translational modification, were detected. We identified the CRISPR-Cas system in our isolate, which was classified as Type II-U based on the database and contains 15 spacers. This system functions as an adaptive immune mechanism. The strain was attributed to a new sequence type ST-928, and phylogenetic analysis confirmed that it was related to ST-634 of C. diphtheriae strains isolated in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free