Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesLaboratory StudyEurope PMCOpen access

Rapid molecular detection of macrolide resistance

Nelson MM., Waldron CL., Bracht JR.

Laboratory Study, published in BMC Infect Dis (2019) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Laboratory Study
Journal
BMC Infect Dis (2019)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
30755177
PMCID
PMC6373131
DOI
10.1186/s12879-019-3762-4
Citations
9

Abstract (original English)

Background Emerging antimicrobial resistance is a significant threat to human health. However, methods for rapidly diagnosing antimicrobial resistance generally require multi-day culture-based assays. Macrolide efflux gene A, mef(A), provides resistance against erythromycin and azithromycin and is known to be laterally transferred among a wide range of bacterial species. Methods We use Recombinase Polymerase Assay (RPA) to detect the antimicrobial resistance gene mef(A) from raw lysates without nucleic acid purification. To validate these results we performed broth dilution assays to assess antimicrobial resistance to erythromycin and ampicillin (a negative control). Results We validate the detection of mef(A) in raw lysates of Streptococcus pyogenes, S. pneumoniae, S. salivarius, and Enterococcus faecium bacterial lysates within 7-10 min of assay time. We show that detection of mef(A) accurately predicts real antimicrobial resistance assessed by traditional culture methods, and that the assay is robust to high levels of spiked-in non-specific nucleic acid contaminant. The assay was unaffected by single-nucleotide polymorphisms within divergent mef(A) gene sequences, strengthening its utility as a robust diagnostic tool. Conclusions This finding opens the door to implementation of rapid genomic diagnostics in a clinical setting, while providing researchers a rapid, cost-effecti

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is preclinical work; animal or laboratory results cannot be applied to humans.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence
HumansStreptococcus pneumoniaeStreptococcus pyogenesMacrolidesErythromycinAzithromycinAnti-Bacterial AgentsMicrobial Sensitivity TestsDrug Resistance, BacterialGenes, Bacterial

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.