Search

IntroductionFor Streptococcus pneumoniae, β-lactam susceptibility can be predicted from the amino acid sequence of the penicillin-binding proteins PBP1a, PBP2b, and PBP2x. The combination of PBP-subtypes provides a PBP-profile, which correlates to a phenotypic minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC). The non-S. pneumoniae Mitis-group streptococci (MGS) have similar PBPs and exchange pbp-alleles with S. pneumoniae. We studied whether a simple BLAST analysis could be used to predict phenotypic susceptibility in Danish S. pneumoniae isolates and in internationally collected MGS.MethodIsolates with available WGS and phenotypic susceptibility data were included. For each isolate, the best matching PBP-profile was identified by BLAST analysis. The corresponding MICs for penicillin and ceftriaxone was retrieved. Category agreement (CA), minor-, major-, and very major discrepancy was calculated. Genotypic-phenotypic accuracy was examined with Deming regression.ResultsAmong 88 S. pneumoniae isolates, 55 isolates had a recognized PBP-profile, and CA was 100% for penicillin and 98.2% for ceftriaxone. In 33 S. pneumoniae isolates with a new PBP-profile, CA was 90.9% (penicillin) and 93.8% (ceftriaxone) using the nearest recognized PBP-profile. Applying the S. pneumoniae database to non-S. pneumoniae MGS revealed that none had a recognized PBP-profile. For Streptococcus pseudopneumoniae, CA was 100% for penicillin and ceftriaxone in 19 susceptible isolates. In 33 Streptococcus mitis isolates, CA was 75.8% (penicillin) and 86.2% (ceftriaxone) and in 25 Streptococcus oralis isolates CA was 8% (penicillin) and 100% (ceftriaxone).ConclusionUsing a simple BLAST analysis, genotypic susceptibility prediction was accurate in Danish S. pneumoniae isolates, particularly in isolates with recognized PBP-profiles. Susceptibility was poorly predicted in other MGS using the current database.

Enteroaggregative Escherichia coli (EAEC) has been associated with persistent diarrhea, reduced growth acceleration, and failure to thrive in children living in developing countries and with childhood diarrhea in general in industrialized countries. The clinical implications of an EAEC carrier-status in children in industrialized countries warrants clarification. To investigate the pathological significance of an EAEC carrier-state in the industrialized countries, we designed a one-year dynamic cohort study and performed follow-up every second month, where the study participants submitted a stool sample and answered a questionnaire regarding gastrointestinal symptoms and exposures. Exposures included foreign travel, consumption of antibiotics and contact with a diseased animal.In the capital area of Denmark, a total of 179 children aged 0–6 years were followed in a cohort study, in the period between 2009 and 2013. This is the first investigation of the incidence and pathological significance of EAEC in Danish children attending daycare facilities. Conventional microbiological detection of enteric pathogens was performed at Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark and at Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. Parents completed questionnaires regarding gastrointestinal symptoms. The EAEC strains were further characterized by serotyping, phylogenetic analysis, and susceptibility testing. EAEC was detected in 25 (14%) of the children during the observational period of one year. One or more gastrointestinal symptoms were reported from 56% of the EAEC-positive children. Diarrhea was reported in six (24%) of the EAEC positive children, but no cases of weight loss and general failure to thrive were observed. The EAEC strains detected comprised a large number of different serotypes, confirming the genetic heterogeneity of this pathotype. EAEC was highly prevalent (n = 25, 14%) in Danish children in daycare centers and was accompanied by gastrointestinal symptoms in 56% of the infected children. No serotype or phylogenetic group was specifically linked to children with disease.