CAMP-negative Streptococcus agalactiae strains exhibited complete or partial chromosomal deletions of the CAMP-factor encoding gene cfb.

IF 3.7 2区 生物学 Q2 MICROBIOLOGY
Xixi Lai, Meihong Chen, Jianwei Wang, Junjun Wang, Hui Lv, Haihua Xie, Wenjuan He, Dongjie Chen, Yi Huang, Pengwei Cai, Lilan Zheng
{"title":"CAMP-negative <i>Streptococcus agalactiae</i> strains exhibited complete or partial chromosomal deletions of the CAMP-factor encoding gene <i>cfb</i>.","authors":"Xixi Lai, Meihong Chen, Jianwei Wang, Junjun Wang, Hui Lv, Haihua Xie, Wenjuan He, Dongjie Chen, Yi Huang, Pengwei Cai, Lilan Zheng","doi":"10.1128/spectrum.03257-24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Universal antepartum group B streptococcus (GBS) screening and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) have effectively reduced early-onset GBS infections. However, GBS strains with chromosomal deletions affecting the <i>cfb</i> gene may produce false negatives in both the CAMP test and <i>cfb</i>-based molecular diagnostics, potentially increasing the risk of neonatal infections. Vaginal swabs were collected from pregnant women at 35-37 weeks of gestation in our hospital and cultured on agar. Suspected GBS strains were initially identified using the CAMP test and then confirmed with the VITEK-2 system. CAMP-negative GBS strains underwent additional testing by qPCR, 16S rDNA, serotyping, and multilocus sequence typing (MLST). PCR for the <i>cfb</i> gene and whole-genome sequencing were performed on CAMP-negative strains. From 5,794 samples, 526 (9.1%) GBS strains, including 19 (3.6%) CAMP-negative strains and 2 strains from the same patient, were isolated. All 19 CAMP-negative strains were serotypes III and ST862. Among these strains, only one strain was <i>cfb</i> positive by qPCR, whereas all tested positive with a multitarget qPCR kit for <i>cfb</i> and <i>cps</i>. PCR amplification upstream of the <i>cfb</i> gene produced a specific band in strain PP669713 only, suggesting N-terminal <i>cfb</i> gene retention in PP669713 and complete <i>cfb</i> loss in the other strains. Whole-genome sequencing confirmed a chromosomal deletion in PP669713. Antibiotic susceptibility testing revealed no resistance to penicillin. However, CAMP-positive strains presented a greater prevalence of resistance to ciprofloxacin, and levofloxacin than CAMP-negative strains did. Our study highlights the potential risk of missed GBS detection using CAMP tests and <i>cfb</i>-targeted molecular assays.</p><p><strong>Importance: </strong>Our work makes several novel contributions to the field. (i) We report the first documented case of a C-terminal deletion of the <i>cfb</i> gene in a CAMP-negative GBS strain, demonstrating that both N-terminal and C-terminal regions are essential for cohemolytic activity. (ii) Our findings reveal that CAMP-negative GBS strains (3.6% of isolates) are more prevalent than previously recognized, with most cases resulting from complete chromosomal deletions of the <i>cfb</i> gene. (iii) We provide evidence that single-target molecular assays targeting only the <i>cfb</i> gene may miss GBS detection, highlighting the necessity for multi-target approaches in clinical diagnostics. (iv) We demonstrate a unique antibiotic resistance pattern in CAMP-negative strains, showing significantly lower resistance to certain antibiotics compared to CAMP-positive strains.</p>","PeriodicalId":18670,"journal":{"name":"Microbiology spectrum","volume":" ","pages":"e0325724"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microbiology spectrum","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.03257-24","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Universal antepartum group B streptococcus (GBS) screening and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) have effectively reduced early-onset GBS infections. However, GBS strains with chromosomal deletions affecting the cfb gene may produce false negatives in both the CAMP test and cfb-based molecular diagnostics, potentially increasing the risk of neonatal infections. Vaginal swabs were collected from pregnant women at 35-37 weeks of gestation in our hospital and cultured on agar. Suspected GBS strains were initially identified using the CAMP test and then confirmed with the VITEK-2 system. CAMP-negative GBS strains underwent additional testing by qPCR, 16S rDNA, serotyping, and multilocus sequence typing (MLST). PCR for the cfb gene and whole-genome sequencing were performed on CAMP-negative strains. From 5,794 samples, 526 (9.1%) GBS strains, including 19 (3.6%) CAMP-negative strains and 2 strains from the same patient, were isolated. All 19 CAMP-negative strains were serotypes III and ST862. Among these strains, only one strain was cfb positive by qPCR, whereas all tested positive with a multitarget qPCR kit for cfb and cps. PCR amplification upstream of the cfb gene produced a specific band in strain PP669713 only, suggesting N-terminal cfb gene retention in PP669713 and complete cfb loss in the other strains. Whole-genome sequencing confirmed a chromosomal deletion in PP669713. Antibiotic susceptibility testing revealed no resistance to penicillin. However, CAMP-positive strains presented a greater prevalence of resistance to ciprofloxacin, and levofloxacin than CAMP-negative strains did. Our study highlights the potential risk of missed GBS detection using CAMP tests and cfb-targeted molecular assays.

Importance: Our work makes several novel contributions to the field. (i) We report the first documented case of a C-terminal deletion of the cfb gene in a CAMP-negative GBS strain, demonstrating that both N-terminal and C-terminal regions are essential for cohemolytic activity. (ii) Our findings reveal that CAMP-negative GBS strains (3.6% of isolates) are more prevalent than previously recognized, with most cases resulting from complete chromosomal deletions of the cfb gene. (iii) We provide evidence that single-target molecular assays targeting only the cfb gene may miss GBS detection, highlighting the necessity for multi-target approaches in clinical diagnostics. (iv) We demonstrate a unique antibiotic resistance pattern in CAMP-negative strains, showing significantly lower resistance to certain antibiotics compared to CAMP-positive strains.

CAMP 阴性的无乳链球菌菌株表现出 CAMP 因子编码基因 cfb 的染色体完全或部分缺失。
产前普遍进行B族链球菌(GBS)筛查和产时抗生素预防(IAP)可有效减少早发性GBS感染。然而,影响cfb基因的染色体缺失的GBS菌株可能在CAMP测试和基于cfb的分子诊断中产生假阴性,潜在地增加了新生儿感染的风险。收集我院妊娠35-37周孕妇阴道拭子,琼脂培养。采用CAMP试验初步鉴定疑似GBS菌株,然后用VITEK-2系统进行确认。对camp阴性GBS菌株进行qPCR、16S rDNA、血清分型和多位点序列分型(MLST)检测。对camp阴性菌株进行cfb基因PCR和全基因组测序。从5794份样本中分离出GBS菌株526株(9.1%),其中camp阴性19株(3.6%),同一例患者分离出2株。19株camp阴性菌株均为血清III型和ST862型。在这些菌株中,只有一株菌株qPCR检测为cfb阳性,而cfb和cps的多靶点qPCR试剂盒检测均为阳性。cfb基因上游的PCR扩增仅在菌株PP669713中产生特异性条带,表明n端cfb基因在PP669713中保留,而在其他菌株中完全丢失。全基因组测序证实PP669713存在染色体缺失。抗生素敏感性试验显示对青霉素无耐药性。然而,与camp阴性菌株相比,camp阳性菌株对环丙沙星和左氧氟沙星的耐药率更高。我们的研究强调了使用CAMP测试和cfb靶向分子分析错过GBS检测的潜在风险。重要性:我们的工作对该领域做出了一些新的贡献。(i)我们报道了首例在camp阴性的GBS菌株中发现cfb基因c端缺失的病例,这表明n端和c端区域对溶血活性都是必不可少的。(ii)我们的研究结果显示,camp阴性的GBS菌株(占分离株的3.6%)比以前认识到的更为普遍,大多数病例是由cfb基因的染色体完全缺失引起的。(iii)我们提供的证据表明,仅针对cfb基因的单靶点分子检测可能会错过GBS检测,这突出了临床诊断中多靶点方法的必要性。(iv)我们在camp阴性菌株中证明了一种独特的抗生素耐药模式,与camp阳性菌株相比,对某些抗生素的耐药性显着降低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Microbiology spectrum
Microbiology spectrum Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Genetics
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
1800
期刊介绍: Microbiology Spectrum publishes commissioned review articles on topics in microbiology representing ten content areas: Archaea; Food Microbiology; Bacterial Genetics, Cell Biology, and Physiology; Clinical Microbiology; Environmental Microbiology and Ecology; Eukaryotic Microbes; Genomics, Computational, and Synthetic Microbiology; Immunology; Pathogenesis; and Virology. Reviews are interrelated, with each review linking to other related content. A large board of Microbiology Spectrum editors aids in the development of topics for potential reviews and in the identification of an editor, or editors, who shepherd each collection.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信