Evidence Hub

Genomic determinants of antibiotic resistance for Helicobacter pylori treatment: a retrospective phenotypic and genotypic observational study

Martínez-Martínez FJ, Chiner-Oms Á, Furió V, HpGP Research Network, Yamaoka Y, Dekker JP, Mégraud F, Bénéjat L et al.

The Lancet. Microbe, 2026

1,779 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Rising antimicrobial resistance of Helicobacter pylori is a public health challenge. Genomic-based susceptibility testing allows for the identification of resistance-associated mutations, complementing conventional diagnostics and advancing towards pathogen-based personalised therapies. Our study aimed to identify genes and mutations involved in antimicrobial resistance in H pylori and evaluate the extent to which these markers can be used as predictors of phenotypic resistance against clarithromycin and levofloxacin.

METHODS: In this retrospective phenotypic and genotypic observational study, we included 1011 H pylori whole-genome sequences and strains of known geographical origin from the H pylori Genome Project (HpGP) collection. We performed phenotypic clarithromycin and levofloxacin susceptibility testing on a subset of 419 HpGP strains using Etest at a centralised laboratory. A genomic analysis was conducted to identify 23S rRNA and gyrA variants and build a curated catalogue of mutations associated with resistance to clarithromycin (ie, 23S rRNA 2142A→G, 2142A→C, and 2143A→G) and levofloxacin (ie, gyrA A88V or A88P, N87K or N87I, and D91G, D91N, or D91Y). Genotype-phenotype concordance was assessed to estimate sensitivity and specificity, and the curated catalogue of resistance-associated mutations was applied to the complete HpGP set. Region-specific prevalence of resistance-associated mutations was calculated for a combined dataset including the HpGP…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,779 participants or records.

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