TY - JOUR
T1 - Clostridioides difficile Whole-genome Sequencing Differentiates Relapse with the Same Strain from Reinfection with a New Strain
AU - Cho, Janice
AU - Cunningham, Scott
AU - Pu, Meng
AU - Lennon, Ryan J.
AU - Dens Higano, Jennifer
AU - Jeraldo, Patricio
AU - Sampathkumar, Priya
AU - Shannon, Samantha
AU - Kashyap, Purna C.
AU - Patel, Robin
N1 - Funding Information:
Financial support. This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (grant number National Institutes of Health DK114007 to P. C. K.) and the Center for Individualized Medicine at the Mayo Clinic.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/3/1
Y1 - 2021/3/1
N2 - Background: Current approaches in tracking Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and individualizing patient management are incompletely defined. Methods: We recruited 468 subjects with CDI at Mayo Clinic Rochester between May and December 2016 and performed whole-genome sequencing (WGS) on C. difficile isolates from 397. WGS was also performed on isolates from a subset of the subjects at the time of a recurrence of infection. The sequence data were analyzed by determining core genome multilocus sequence type (cgMLST), with isolates grouped by allelic differences and the predicted ribotype. Results: There were no correlations between C. difficile isolates based either on cgMLST or ribotype groupings and CDI outcome. An epidemiologic assessment of hospitalized subjects harboring C. difficile isolates with ≤2 allelic differences, based on standard infection prevention and control assessment, revealed no evidence of person-to-person transmission. Interestingly, community-acquired CDI subjects in 40% of groups with ≤2 allelic differences resided within the same zip code. Among 18 subjects clinically classified as having recurrent CDI, WGS revealed 14 with initial and subsequent isolates differing by ≤2 allelic differences, suggesting a relapse of infection with the same initial strain, and 4 with isolates differing by >50 allelic differences, suggesting reinfection. Among the 5 subjects classified as having a reinfection based on the timing of recurrence, 3 had isolates with ≤2 allelic differences between them, suggesting a relapse, and 2 had isolates differing by >50 allelic differences, suggesting reinfection. Conclusions: Our findings point to potential transmission of C. difficile in the community. WGS better differentiates relapse from reinfection than do definitions based on the timing of recurrence.
AB - Background: Current approaches in tracking Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) and individualizing patient management are incompletely defined. Methods: We recruited 468 subjects with CDI at Mayo Clinic Rochester between May and December 2016 and performed whole-genome sequencing (WGS) on C. difficile isolates from 397. WGS was also performed on isolates from a subset of the subjects at the time of a recurrence of infection. The sequence data were analyzed by determining core genome multilocus sequence type (cgMLST), with isolates grouped by allelic differences and the predicted ribotype. Results: There were no correlations between C. difficile isolates based either on cgMLST or ribotype groupings and CDI outcome. An epidemiologic assessment of hospitalized subjects harboring C. difficile isolates with ≤2 allelic differences, based on standard infection prevention and control assessment, revealed no evidence of person-to-person transmission. Interestingly, community-acquired CDI subjects in 40% of groups with ≤2 allelic differences resided within the same zip code. Among 18 subjects clinically classified as having recurrent CDI, WGS revealed 14 with initial and subsequent isolates differing by ≤2 allelic differences, suggesting a relapse of infection with the same initial strain, and 4 with isolates differing by >50 allelic differences, suggesting reinfection. Among the 5 subjects classified as having a reinfection based on the timing of recurrence, 3 had isolates with ≤2 allelic differences between them, suggesting a relapse, and 2 had isolates differing by >50 allelic differences, suggesting reinfection. Conclusions: Our findings point to potential transmission of C. difficile in the community. WGS better differentiates relapse from reinfection than do definitions based on the timing of recurrence.
KW - Clostridioides difficile
KW - Clostridium difficile
KW - clinical outcomes
KW - ribotype
KW - whole-genome sequencing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85100545075&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85100545075&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/cid/ciaa159
DO - 10.1093/cid/ciaa159
M3 - Article
C2 - 32064535
AN - SCOPUS:85100545075
SN - 1058-4838
VL - 72
SP - 806
EP - 813
JO - Clinical Infectious Diseases
JF - Clinical Infectious Diseases
IS - 5
ER -