Evidence Hub

Opportunities and limitations of genomics for diagnosing bedaquiline-resistant tuberculosis: a systematic review and individual isolate meta-analysis

Nimmo C, Bionghi N, Cummings MJ, Perumal R, Hopson M, Al Jubaer S, Naidoo K, Wolf A et al.

The Lancet. Microbe, 2024

15 citations

Abstract

Background: Clinical bedaquiline resistance predominantly involves mutations in mmpR5 (Rv0678). However, mmpR5 resistance-associated variants (RAVs) have a variable relationship with phenotypic Mycobacterium tuberculosis resistance. We did a systematic review to assess the maximal sensitivity of sequencing bedaquiline resistance-associated genes and evaluate the association between RAVs and phenotypic resistance, using traditional and machine-based learning techniques.

Methods: We screened public databases for articles published from database inception until Oct 31, 2022. Eligible studies performed sequencing of at least mmpR5 and atpE on clinically sourced M tuberculosis isolates and measured bedaquiline minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs). A bias risk scoring tool was used to identify bias. Individual genetic mutations and corresponding MICs were aggregated, and odds ratios calculated to determine association of mutations with resistance. Machine-based learning methods were used to define test characteristics of parsimonious sets of diagnostic RAVs, and mmpR5 mutations were mapped to the protein structure to highlight mechanisms of resistance. This study was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42022346547).

Findings: 18 eligible studies were identified, comprising 975 M tuberculosis isolates containing at least one potential RAV (mutation in mmpR5, atpE, atpB, or pepQ), with 201 (20·6%) showing phenotypic bedaquiline resistance. 84 (29·5%) of 285 resistant…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

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