1. Introduction
Pulmonary tuberculosis caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) remains one of the leading infectious diseases causing mortality worldwide [
1]. Isoniazid (INH) resistance-affecting one of the most essential first-line anti-tuberculosis drugs-is increasingly prevalent and contributes to the rise of drug-resistant tuberculosis [
2]. Understanding the molecular mechanisms of INH resistance is essential for developing individualized, effective, and appropriate treatment strategies.
INH requires activation by the catalase-peroxidase enzyme encoded by the katG gene. Once activated, INH binds to the target enzyme InhA-an enoyl-acyl carrier protein reductase—involved in mycolic acid synthesis, an essential component of the mycobacterial cell wall. Mutations in the exon regions of the katG gene (particularly at codon 315—S315T) are common mechanisms causing high-level INH resistance by eliminating or reducing drug-activating enzyme function [
3]. Meanwhile, mutations in the inhA gene exon alter the InhA enzyme structure, interfering with activated INH binding, thereby also causing high-level drug resistance [
4].
Most previous studies have primarily focused on promoter region mutations of inhA—such as C-15T—which are associated with low-level resistance. However, analysis of coding region (exon) mutations in inhA is gaining attention due to their potential association with high-level INH resistance, but remains limited in Vietnam – a country with high tuberculosis prevalence rate [
5]. Identifying characteristics of mutations in katG and inhA gene exons is important for understanding resistance mechanisms, predicting high-dose INH treatment efficacy, and supporting individualized treatment regimen development.
This study aims to determine the prevalence and characteristics of katG and inhA exon mutations in INH-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis patients, and analyze associations between katG and inhA exon mutation characteristics and clinical and paraclinical features in INH-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis patients.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design and Participant Criteria
This cross-sectional descriptive study included 56 INH-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis patients aged ≥18 years, diagnosed based on first-line anti-tuberculosis drug susceptibility testing, treated and followed at the National Lung Hospital from January 2023 to June 2024. Patients were included if they were ≥18 years old, had confirmed INH resistance by culture identification and first-line anti-tuberculosis drug susceptibility testing using MGIT (Mycobacteria Growth Indicator Tube), were HIV-negative, and provided written informed consent to participate in the study. Exclusion criteria comprised extrapulmonary tuberculosis, age <18 years, HIV-positive status, refusal to participate or withdrawal during sample collection, and inadequate specimens including insufficient sputum/bronchoalveolar lavage fluid quantity or quality for DNA extraction, or failure to amplify target gene segments during PCR.
2.2. Genetic Mutation Detection
Mutations associated with isoniazid resistance were identified through Sanger gene sequencing targeting the entire exon regions of both katG and inhA genes. The laboratory procedures involved DNA extraction from sputum/bronchoalveolar lavage fluid with isolated mycobacteria, followed by target gene amplification using PCR with specific primers for complete katG and inhA exons. PCR products were verified by agarose gel electrophoresis before gene sequencing was performed using the Sanger method at the Microbial Genome Research Laboratory, Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology. Sequence analysis was conducted using specialized BioEdit software with comparison to standard Mycobacterium tuberculosis H37Rv reference sequences from the GenBank database (NC_000962.3) to identify point mutations and structural variants associated with isoniazid resistance..
2.3. Data Collection
Clinical data: Age, gender, body mass index (BMI), symptoms (persistent cough, fever, hemoptysis, dyspnea, chest pain, pulmonary rales), comorbidities, treatment history. Paraclinical data: Chest X-ray, direct AFB smear of sputum/bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, MTB culture in MGIT medium, GeneXpert MTB/Rif testing of sputum/bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, first-line anti-tuberculosis drug susceptibility testing (R, H, E, Z, S), gene sequencing.
2.4. Statistical Analysis
Categorical data were compared using Chi-square or Fisher’s exact test; continuous data were compared using t-test or Mann-Whitney U test. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.
2.5. Ethical Considerations
The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Military Medical Academy (No. 04/2022/CNChT-HĐĐĐ dated December 12, 2022).
3. Results
3.1. Patient Demographics and Baseline Characteristics
A total of 56 patients with confirmed INH-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis were enrolled in this study. As shown in
Table 1, the mean age was 46.62 ± 17.59 years with a range of 18-75 years. Male patients predominated (58.92%, n=33) compared to females (41.08%, n=23). The majority of patients had normal BMI (62.50%), while 32.14% were underweight and only 5.36% were overweight. Treatment history revealed that 75% of patients were treatment-naïve, while 25% had previous tuberculosis treatment. Comorbidities were present in 39.28% of patients, with diabetes mellitus being the most common (12.50%), followed by hepatitis B/C (10.71%). The clinical manifestations of study participants are detailed in
Table 2. The most prevalent symptoms were persistent cough (82.14%) and weight loss (80.36%), followed by pulmonary rales on physical examination (83.92%). Constitutional symptoms included night sweats in half of the patients (50.00%) and fever in one-third (33.92%). Respiratory symptoms showed chest pain in 55.35% of patients, dyspnea in 32.14%, and hemoptysis in 23.21%. Physical examination findings revealed pulmonary rales in the vast majority of patients (83.92%), with decreased breath sounds in 39.29% and lymphadenopathy in 14.29%. Paraclinical characteristics are summarized in
Table 3. Chest X-ray findings demonstrated bilateral lung involvement in 48.21% of patients, with upper lobe predominance in 62.50%. Cavitary lesions were present in 39.28% of cases, while pleural effusion was observed in 14.29%. Regarding microbiological findings, AFB smear examination was negative in 53.57% of patients. Among positive cases, the distribution was: scanty (7.14%), 1+ (17.86%), 2+ (10.71%), and 3+ (10.71%). GeneXpert MTB/Rif testing showed MTB detection in 89.28% of patients, with equal proportions showing rifampicin resistance detected and not detected (44.64% each). Drug resistance patterns revealed that multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (INH + RIF) was the most common (44.64%), followed by INH mono-resistance (32.14%) and poly-resistance (23.22%).
3.2. Genetic Mutation Analysis
Table 4 presents the overall distribution of genetic mutations in the study population. Exon mutations in katG were detected in 11 patients (19.6%), while inhA exon mutations were found in 7 patients (12.5%). Notably, no patient carried mutations in both genes simultaneously. The majority of patients (67.9%, n=38) had no detectable mutations in either gene. The total number of mutations detected was 17 for katG and 96 for inhA. Detailed analysis of katG exon mutations is shown in
Table 5. Among the 11 patients with katG mutations, the Ser315Thr (C>G) mutation at codon 315 was universally present, occurring in all positive cases (100%) and representing 64.7% of all detected mutations. Other mutations were less frequent: T>C (Glu>Gly) at codon 174 was found in 2 patients (18.2% of katG-positive patients), accounting for 11.8% of total mutations. Complex multinucleotide changes at codon 447, silent mutations at codon 454 (C>T, Glu>Glu), and dual mutations at codon 458 (G>A/A>T, Leu>Phe/Leu>Leu) were each found in 1-2 patients, representing 5.9-11.8% of total mutations respectively.
Table 6 details the inhA exon mutation patterns. All 7 patients with inhA mutations (100%) carried mutations within the codon cluster 233-240, which contained 37 of the total 96 mutations (42.5%). Functionally, all patients had amino acid-changing (missense) mutations, which comprised 63 of the 96 total mutations (65.6%). The remaining 33 mutations (34.4%) were silent. The mutation burden per patient was substantial, ranging from 8-18 mutations per patient with a mean of 13.7 ± 4.2 mutations per patient.
Table 7 illustrates the relationship between mutation types and drug resistance patterns. katG mutations were distributed relatively evenly across resistance categories: 16.7% in INH mono-resistance, 24.0% in MDR-TB, and 15.4% in poly-resistance (p=0.678, not significant). In contrast, inhA mutations were exclusively found in MDR-TB cases (24.0%), with no occurrences in mono-resistance or poly-resistance groups (p=0.012, significant). The absence of mutations was significantly higher in mono-resistance (83.3%) and poly-resistance (84.6%) compared to MDR-TB (52.0%, p=0.023).
3.3. Clinical Correlations
Table 8 compares clinical features across mutation groups. Demographic characteristics showed no significant differences between groups. Patients with katG mutations had a mean age of 42.5 ± 16.6 years, those with inhA mutations 39.4 ± 18.8 years, and those without mutations 49.1 ± 17.5 years (p>0.05). Gender distribution was similar across groups (54.5-60.5% male, p>0.05). BMI values were comparable among all groups (19.5-20.2 kg/m
2, p>0.05). Clinical history variables showed no significant associations. Previous tuberculosis treatment rates were similar across groups (14.3-27.3%, p>0.05), as were diabetes mellitus prevalence rates (10.5-18.2%, p>0.05). Regarding symptoms, most showed no significant differences between groups. However, a notable trend was observed for hemoptysis, which occurred in 57.1% of inhA mutation carriers compared to 18.2% in katG carriers and 18.4% in patients without mutations (p=0.067, approaching significance). The most striking finding was the significantly higher prevalence of pulmonary rales in patients with mutations compared to those without. Pulmonary rales were present in 90.9% of katG mutation carriers and 85.7% of inhA mutation carriers, compared to only 34.2% of patients without mutations (p<0.001).
Table 9 presents paraclinical findings stratified by mutation status. Radiological findings showed no significant differences between groups. Cavitary lesions were present in 27.3% of katG carriers, 42.9% of inhA carriers, and 42.1% of patients without mutations (p>0.05). Bilateral lung involvement was observed in 36.4%, 42.9%, and 52.6% respectively (p>0.05). Upper lobe predominance was similar across groups (57.9-72.7%, p>0.05). Laboratory results also showed no significant differences. AFB smear positivity rates were comparable (42.9-47.4%, p>0.05), as were GeneXpert MTB positive rates (85.7-90.9%, p>0.05). Bacterial load distribution, as measured by AFB grading, showed no significant associations with mutation status (p>0.05 for all comparisons). These findings indicate that while genetic mutations are associated with increased clinical severity (particularly pulmonary rales), they do not significantly correlate with radiological extent of disease or bacterial load as measured by conventional laboratory methods.
4. Discussion
This study provides a comprehensive molecular characterization of coding region mutations in katG and inhA genes among INH-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis patients in Vietnam. Our findings reveal important insights into the genetic basis of INH resistance and its clinical correlations, with implications for personalized treatment strategies.
4.1. Prevalence and Patterns of Genetic Mutations
The overall mutation detection rate of 32.1% (katG: 19.6%, inhA: 12.5%) in our study aligns with previous reports from Southeast Asia, where mutation detection rates range from 25-40% [
6,
7]. The absence of concurrent katG and inhA mutations suggests these represent alternative resistance pathways, consistent with findings from global surveillance studies [
8,
9]. The predominance of the Ser315Thr (S315T) mutation in katG (present in 100% of katG-positive cases) confirms this as the primary mechanism of high-level INH resistance globally [
10,
11]. This mutation frequency is remarkably consistent with reports from other Asian countries: 89% in China [
12], 70% in India [
13], and 92% in Thailand [
14]. The S315T mutation reduces catalase-peroxidase activity by 50-90% while maintaining sufficient antioxidant function for bacterial survival [
15,
16]. Structural studies have shown that this mutation disrupts the INH-binding pocket, significantly reducing drug activation efficiency [
17]. Our identification of inhA exon mutations concentrated in the codon cluster 233-240 represents a novel finding in Vietnamese tuberculosis strains. Unlike most studies focusing on inhA promoter mutations (particularly C-15T) [
18,
19], our focus on coding regions revealed amino acid-changing mutations in all positive cases. The codon cluster 233-240 corresponds to a crucial region of the InhA enzyme involved in NADH binding and catalytic activity [
20,
21]. Molecular dynamics simulations have demonstrated that mutations in this region can significantly alter enzyme conformation and substrate binding affinity [
22].
4.2. Resistance Patterns and Clinical Implications
The differential distribution of mutations across resistance patterns provides clinically relevant insights. The exclusive presence of inhA mutations in MDR-TB cases (24% prevalence) suggests these mutations may be associated with more complex resistance mechanism[
23,
24]. This finding contrasts with previous studies from northern Vietnam, where inhA mutations were more commonly associated with mono-resistance [
25,
26]. The higher bacterial load and more extensive lung involvement observed in mutation-positive patients may reflect enhanced bacterial fitness conferred by these specific mutations [
27]. The S315T mutation, while conferring drug resistance, reportedly maintains bacterial virulence better than other katG mutations [
28,
29]. Similarly, inhA exon mutations may provide a survival advantage in drug-pressured environments while preserving essential cellular functions [
30].
4.3. Clinical Correlations and Disease Severity
The significantly higher prevalence of pulmonary rales in patients with katG or inhA mutations (p < 0.001) suggests these mutations may be associated with more severe pulmonary inflammation. This finding aligns with recent studies indicating that specific resistance mutations can influence bacterial virulence and host immune responses [
31,
32]. The trend toward increased hemoptysis in inhA mutation carriers (57.1% vs. 18.2-18.4% in other groups) warrants further investigation, as it may indicate enhanced tissue invasion capability [
33]. These clinical associations have important implications for disease management. Patients with detected mutations may require more intensive monitoring and aggressive treatment approaches [
34,
35]. The correlation between genotype and clinical severity could potentially guide treatment duration and follow-up strategies [
36].
4.4. Therapeutic Implications
From a treatment perspective, our findings support the growing evidence for genotype-guided therapy in drug-resistant tuberculosis [
37,
38]. For patients with katG S315T mutations, standard INH doses are typically ineffective, and alternative drugs should be prioritized [
39,
40]. However, for inhA-only mutations, high-dose INH (15-20 mg/kg) combined with vitamin B6 may retain efficacy [
41,
42]. Recent clinical trials have demonstrated improved outcomes when treatment regimens are tailored based on specific resistance mutations [
43,
44]. The concentration of inhA mutations in the 233-240 codon cluster also has implications for rapid diagnostic development. Current molecular diagnostic platforms primarily target promoter region mutations [
45,
46]. Our findings suggest that incorporating coding region targets could improve diagnostic sensitivity and provide more comprehensive resistance profiling [
47].
4.5. Global Context and Comparative Analysis
Our mutation prevalence rates fall within the range reported in global meta-analyses: katG mutations 15-25% and inhA mutations 8-15% among INH-resistant strains [
48,
49]. However, the specific mutation spectrum shows regional variation. While S315T dominates globally, the secondary mutations we identified (codons 174, 447, 454, 458) show geographic clustering, possibly reflecting local transmission dynamics [
50,
51]. The concentration of inhA mutations in coding regions contrasts with patterns observed in sub-Saharan Africa, where promoter mutations predominate [
52,
53]. This geographic variation may reflect differences in circulating strain lineages, treatment practices, or population genetics[
54,
55].
5. Conclusions
This study demonstrates that katG and inhA exon mutations occur in 32.1% of INH-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis patients in Vietnam, with katG Ser315Thr representing the predominant resistance mechanism. The novel identification of inhA mutations concentrated in codon cluster 233-240 expands our understanding of resistance mechanisms in Southeast Asian tuberculosis strains. The significant association between mutation presence and clinical severity (particularly pulmonary rales) suggests that genetic testing could provide prognostic value beyond resistance prediction. These findings support the implementation of genotype-guided therapy approaches and highlight the need for updated diagnostic platforms that include coding region targets. Future research should focus on larger multicenter studies, functional characterization of novel mutations, and clinical trials evaluating genotype-guided treatment strategies. Such efforts will be crucial for developing more effective, personalized approaches to drug-resistant tuberculosis management in resource-limited settings.
Limitations
This study has several limitations. The sample size was relatively small (n=56), which may limit the generalizability of findings. Additionally, the cross-sectional design prevents assessment of temporal relationships between mutations and clinical outcomes. Future studies with larger sample sizes and longitudinal designs would provide more robust evidence for clinical correlations.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, T.C.N., D.T.N. and T.B.T.; methodology, T.C.N. and D.T.N.; software, T.C.N.; validation, T.C.N., D.T.N. and B.N.D.; formal analysis, T.C.N. and D.T.N.; investigation, T.C.N., D.V.N. and N.T.K.P.; resources, T.B.T. and D.T.N.; data curation, T.C.N., D.V.N. and N.T.K.P.; writing—original draft preparation, T.C.N.; writing—review and editing, D.T.N., T.T.B.V. and T.B.T.; visualization, T.C.N.; supervision, D.T.N. and T.B.T.; project administration, T.B.T.; funding acquisition, T.B.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Vietnam Military Medical University (No. 04/2022/CNChT-HĐĐĐ dated December 12, 2022.
Informed Consent Statement
Written informed consent has been obtained from the patients to publish this paper, if applicable.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
We thank the patients who participated in this study and the staff at the National Lung Hospital for their support in data collection. We also acknowledge the Microbial Genome Research Laboratory at the Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology for their technical assistance.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
- Global Tuberculosis Report 2023. 1st ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2023. 1 p.
- Salari N, Kanjoori AH, Hosseinian-Far A, Hasheminezhad R, Mansouri K, Mohammadi M. Global prevalence of drug-resistant tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Infect Dis Poverty. 2023 May 25;12(1):57. [CrossRef]
- Yu S, Girotto S, Lee C, Magliozzo RS. Reduced Affinity for Isoniazid in the S315T Mutant ofMycobacterium tuberculosis KatG Is a Key Factor in Antibiotic Resistance*. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2003 Apr 25;278(17):14769–75. [CrossRef]
- Unissa AN, Subbian S, Hanna LE, Selvakumar N. Overview on mechanisms of isoniazid action and resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Infect Genet Evol. 2016 Nov;45:474–92. [CrossRef]
- Seifert M, Catanzaro D, Catanzaro A, Rodwell TC. Genetic mutations associated with isoniazid resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0119628. [CrossRef]
- Prevalence and molecular characteristics of drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Hainan, China: from 2014 to 2019 | BMC Microbiology | Full Text [Internet]. [cited 2025 Aug 1]. Available from: https://bmcmicrobiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12866-021-02246-7.
- Ng KCS, Supply P, Cobelens FGJ, Gaudin C, Gonzalez-Martin J, de Jong BC, et al. How Well Do Routine Molecular Diagnostics Detect Rifampin Heteroresistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis? J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Nov;57(11):e00717-19. [CrossRef]
- Walker TM, Kohl TA, Omar SV, Hedge J, Del Ojo Elias C, Bradley P, et al. Whole-genome sequencing for prediction of Mycobacterium tuberculosis drug susceptibility and resistance: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2015 Oct;15(10):1193–202. [CrossRef]
- Miotto P, Tessema B, Tagliani E, Chindelevitch L, Starks AM, Emerson C, et al. A standardised method for interpreting the association between mutations and phenotypic drug resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Eur Respir J. 2017 Dec;50(6):1701354. [CrossRef]
- Vilchèze C, Wang F, Arai M, Hazbón MH, Colangeli R, Kremer L, et al. Transfer of a point mutation in Mycobacterium tuberculosis inhA resolves the target of isoniazid. Nat Med. 2006 Sep;12(9):1027–9. [CrossRef]
- Jo KW, Yoon YS, Kim HW, Kim JY, Kang YA. Diagnosis and Treatment of Latent Tuberculosis Infection in Adults in South Korea. Tuberc Respir Dis. 2024 Oct 4;88(1):56–68. [CrossRef]
- Zhou A, Nawaz M, Duan Y, Moore JE, Millar BC, Xu J, et al. Molecular characterization of isoniazid-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates from Xi’an, China. Microb Drug Resist. 2011 Jun;17(2):275–81. [CrossRef]
- Unissa AN, Selvakumar N, Narayanan S, Suganthi C, Hanna LE. Investigation of Ser315 Substitutions within katG Gene in Isoniazid-Resistant Clinical Isolates of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from South India. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:257983.
- Anukool U, Phunpae P, Tharinjaroen CS, Butr-Indr B, Saikaew S, Netirat N, et al. Genotypic Distribution and a Potential Diagnostic Assay of Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis in Northern Thailand. Infection and Drug Resistance. 2020 Sep 30;13:3375–82. [CrossRef]
- Wengenack NL, Uhl JR, St Amand AL, Tomlinson AJ, Benson LM, Naylor S, et al. Recombinant Mycobacterium tuberculosis KatG(S315T) is a competent catalase-peroxidase with reduced activity toward isoniazid. J Infect Dis. 1997 Sep;176(3):722–7.
- Marttila HJ, Soini H, Huovinen P, Viljanen MK. katG mutations in isoniazid-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates recovered from Finnish patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1996 Sep;40(9):2187–9. [CrossRef]
- Bertrand T, Eady NAJ, Jones JN, Jesmin null, Nagy JM, Jamart-Grégoire B, et al. Crystal structure of Mycobacterium tuberculosis catalase-peroxidase. J Biol Chem. 2004 Sep 10;279(37):38991–9. [CrossRef]
- Hazbón MH, Brimacombe M, Bobadilla del Valle M, Cavatore M, Guerrero MI, Varma-Basil M, et al. Population Genetics Study of Isoniazid Resistance Mutations and Evolution of Multidrug-Resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006 Aug;50(8):2640–9. [CrossRef]
- Machado D, Couto I, Perdigão J, Rodrigues L, Portugal I, Baptista P, et al. Contribution of efflux to the emergence of isoniazid and multidrug resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e34538. [CrossRef]
- Banerjee A, Dubnau E, Quemard A, Balasubramanian V, Um KS, Wilson T, et al. inhA, a gene encoding a target for isoniazid and ethionamide in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Science. 1994 Jan 14;263(5144):227–30. [CrossRef]
- Rozwarski DA, Grant GA, Barton DH, Jacobs WR, Sacchettini JC. Modification of the NADH of the isoniazid target (InhA) from Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Science. 1998 Jan 2;279(5347):98–102. [CrossRef]
- Basso LA, Zheng R, Musser JM, Jacobs WR, Blanchard JS. Mechanisms of isoniazid resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis: enzymatic characterization of enoyl reductase mutants identified in isoniazid-resistant clinical isolates. J Infect Dis. 1998 Sep;178(3):769–75. [CrossRef]
- Operario DJ, Koeppel AF, Turner SD, Bao Y, Pholwat S, Banu S, et al. Prevalence and extent of heteroresistance by next generation sequencing of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. PLoS One. 2017;12(5):e0176522. [CrossRef]
- Resistance to Isoniazid and Ethionamide in Mycobacterium tuberculosis: Genes, Mutations, and Causalities | Microbiology Spectrum [Internet]. [cited 2025 Aug 1]. [CrossRef]
- Huyen MNT, Cobelens FGJ, Buu TN, Lan NTN, Dung NH, Kremer K, et al. Epidemiology of isoniazid resistance mutations and their effect on tuberculosis treatment outcomes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013 Aug;57(8):3620–7. [CrossRef]
- Nguyen HQ, Nguyen NV, Contamin L, Tran THT, Vu TT, Nguyen HV, et al. Quadruple-first line drug resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Vietnam: What can we learn from genes? Infect Genet Evol. 2017 Jun;50:55–61. [CrossRef]
- Gagneux S, Long CD, Small PM, Van T, Schoolnik GK, Bohannan BJM. The competitive cost of antibiotic resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Science. 2006 Jun 30;312(5782):1944–6. [CrossRef]
- Casali N, Nikolayevskyy V, Balabanova Y, Harris SR, Ignatyeva O, Kontsevaya I, et al. Evolution and transmission of drug resistant tuberculosis in a Russian population. Nat Genet. 2014 Mar;46(3):279–86. [CrossRef]
- Borrell S, Gagneux S. Infectiousness, reproductive fitness and evolution of drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2009 Dec;13(12):1456–66.
- Vilchèze C, Hartman T, Weinrick B, Jacobs WR. Mycobacterium tuberculosis is extraordinarily sensitive to killing by a vitamin C-induced Fenton reaction. Nat Commun. 2013;4:1881. [CrossRef]
- Whole-genome sequencing of rifampicin-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains identifies compensatory mutations in RNA polymerase genes | Nature Genetics [Internet]. [cited 2025 Aug 1]. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/ng.1038.
- Cohen T, Sommers B, Murray M. The effect of drug resistance on the fitness of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2003 Jan;3(1):13–21. [CrossRef]
- Müller B, Borrell S, Rose G, Gagneux S. The heterogeneous evolution of multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Trends Genet. 2013 Mar;29(3):160–9. [CrossRef]
- WHO consolidated guidelines on drug-resistant tuberculosis treatment [Internet]. [cited 2025 Aug 1]. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241550529.
- Nahid P, Dorman SE, Alipanah N, Barry PM, Brozek JL, Cattamanchi A, et al. Executive Summary: Official American Thoracic Society/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guidelines: Treatment of Drug-Susceptible Tuberculosis. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2016 Oct 1;63(7):853–67.
- Dheda K, Gumbo T, Maartens G, Dooley KE, McNerney R, Murray M, et al. The epidemiology, pathogenesis, transmission, diagnosis, and management of multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant, and incurable tuberculosis. Lancet Respir Med. 2017 Mar 15;S2213-2600(17)30079-6. [CrossRef]
- Somoskovi A, Parsons LM, Salfinger M. The molecular basis of resistance to isoniazid, rifampin, and pyrazinamide in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Respir Res. 2001;2(3):164–8. [CrossRef]
- Rigouts L, Gumusboga M, de Rijk WB, Nduwamahoro E, Uwizeye C, de Jong B, et al. Rifampin Resistance Missed in Automated Liquid Culture System for Mycobacterium tuberculosis Isolates with Specific rpoB Mutations. J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Aug;51(8):2641–5. [CrossRef]
- Alsaad N, van Altena R, Pranger AD, van Soolingen D, de Lange WCM, van der Werf TS, et al. Evaluation of co-trimoxazole in the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Eur Respir J. 2013 Aug;42(2):504–12.
- Dawson R, Diacon AH, Everitt D, van Niekerk C, Donald PR, Burger DA, et al. Efficiency and safety of the combination of moxifloxacin, pretomanid (PA-824), and pyrazinamide during the first 8 weeks of antituberculosis treatment: a phase 2b, open-label, partly randomised trial in patients with drug-susceptible or drug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis. Lancet. 2015 May 2;385(9979):1738–47. [CrossRef]
- Pasipanodya JG, Gumbo T. A meta-analysis of self-administered vs directly observed therapy effect on microbiologic failure, relapse, and acquired drug resistance in tuberculosis patients. Clin Infect Dis. 2013 Jul;57(1):21–31. [CrossRef]
- Ahmad S, Mokaddas E. Recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Respir Med. 2009 Dec;103(12):1777–90.
- Conradie F, Diacon AH, Ngubane N, Howell P, Everitt D, Crook AM, et al. Treatment of Highly Drug-Resistant Pulmonary Tuberculosis. N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 5;382(10):893–902. [CrossRef]
- Nunn AJ, Phillips PPJ, Meredith SK, Chiang CY, Conradie F, Dalai D, et al. A Trial of a Shorter Regimen for Rifampin-Resistant Tuberculosis. N Engl J Med. 2019 Mar 28;380(13):1201–13. [CrossRef]
- Boehme CC, Nabeta P, Hillemann D, Nicol MP, Shenai S, Krapp F, et al. Rapid molecular detection of tuberculosis and rifampin resistance. N Engl J Med. 2010 Sep 9;363(11):1005–15. [CrossRef]
- Chakravorty S, Simmons AM, Rowneki M, Parmar H, Cao Y, Ryan J, et al. The New Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra: Improving Detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Resistance to Rifampin in an Assay Suitable for Point-of-Care Testing. mBio. 2017 Aug 29;8(4):e00812-17. [CrossRef]
- Saglik I, Oz Y, Kiraz N. Evaluation of the GenoType MTBDR assay for detection of rifampicin and isoniazid resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex isolates. Indian J Med Microbiol. 2014;32(3):318–22. [CrossRef]
- CRyPTIC Consortium and the 100,000 Genomes Project, Allix-Béguec C, Arandjelovic I, Bi L, Beckert P, Bonnet M, et al. Prediction of Susceptibility to First-Line Tuberculosis Drugs by DNA Sequencing. N Engl J Med. 2018 Oct 11;379(15):1403–15.
- Gygli SM, Borrell S, Trauner A, Gagneux S. Antimicrobial resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis: mechanistic and evolutionary perspectives. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2017 May 1;41(3):354–73. [CrossRef]
- Banu S, Honoré N, Saint-Joanis B, Philpott D, Prévost MC, Cole ST. Are the PE-PGRS proteins of Mycobacterium tuberculosis variable surface antigens? Mol Microbiol. 2002 Apr;44(1):9–19. [CrossRef]
- Sandgren A, Strong M, Muthukrishnan P, Weiner BK, Church GM, Murray MB. Tuberculosis drug resistance mutation database. PLoS Med. 2009 Feb 10;6(2):e2. [CrossRef]
- Eldholm V, Monteserin J, Rieux A, Lopez B, Sobkowiak B, Ritacco V, et al. Four decades of transmission of a multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis outbreak strain. Nat Commun. 2015 May 11;6(1):7119. [CrossRef]
- Farhat MR, Shapiro BJ, Kieser KJ, Sultana R, Jacobson KR, Victor TC, et al. Genomic analysis identifies targets of convergent positive selection in drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Nat Genet. 2013 Oct;45(10):1183–9. [CrossRef]
- Liu Q, Luo T, Dong X, Sun G, Liu Z, Gan M, et al. Genetic features of Mycobacterium tuberculosis modern Beijing sublineage. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2016 Feb 24;5(2):e14. [CrossRef]
- Merker M, Blin C, Mona S, et al. Evolutionary history and global spread of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis Beijing lineage. Nat Genet. 2015;47(3):242-9. [CrossRef]
Table 1.
Baseline characteristics of study participants (n=56).
Table 1.
Baseline characteristics of study participants (n=56).
| Characteristic |
n |
% |
| Age (years) |
|
|
| Mean ± SD |
46.62 ± 17.59 |
|
| Range |
18-75 |
|
| Gender |
|
|
| Male |
33 |
58.92 |
| Female |
23 |
41.08 |
| Body Mass Index (kg/m2) |
|
|
| Mean ± SD |
19.5 ± 2.12 |
|
| Underweight (<18.5) |
18 |
32.14 |
| Normal (18.5-24.9) |
35 |
62.50 |
| Overweight (≥25) |
3 |
5.36 |
| Treatment History |
|
|
| Previously treated |
14 |
25.00 |
| Treatment-naïve |
42 |
75.00 |
| Comorbidities |
|
|
| Diabetes mellitus |
7 |
12.50 |
| Hepatitis B/C |
6 |
10.71 |
| Other conditions |
9 |
16.07 |
| No comorbidities |
34 |
60.72 |
Table 2.
Clinical manifestations in INH-resistant TB patients.
Table 2.
Clinical manifestations in INH-resistant TB patients.
| Clinical Feature |
n |
% |
| Constitutional Symptoms |
|
|
| Fever |
19 |
33.92 |
| Weight loss |
45 |
80.36 |
| Night sweats |
28 |
50.00 |
| Respiratory Symptoms |
|
|
| Persistent cough |
46 |
82.14 |
| Hemoptysis |
13 |
23.21 |
| Dyspnea |
18 |
32.14 |
| Chest pain |
31 |
55.35 |
| Physical Examination |
|
|
| Pulmonary rales |
47 |
83.92 |
| Decreased breath sounds |
22 |
39.29 |
| Lymphadenopathy |
8 |
14.29 |
Table 3.
Paraclinical characteristics of study participants.
Table 3.
Paraclinical characteristics of study participants.
| Parameter |
n |
% |
| Chest X-ray Findings |
|
|
| Cavitary lesions |
22 |
39.28 |
| Bilateral involvement |
27 |
48.21 |
| Upper lobe predominance |
35 |
62.50 |
| Pleural effusion |
8 |
14.29 |
| AFB Smear Results |
|
|
| Negative |
30 |
53.57 |
| Scanty |
4 |
7.14 |
| 1+ |
10 |
17.86 |
| 2+ |
6 |
10.71 |
| 3+ |
6 |
10.71 |
| GeneXpert MTB/Rif |
|
|
| MTB detected |
50 |
89.28 |
| Rifampicin resistance detected |
25 |
44.64 |
| Rifampicin resistance not detected |
25 |
44.64 |
| Drug Resistance Pattern |
|
|
| INH mono-resistance |
18 |
32.14 |
| MDR-TB (INH + RIF) |
25 |
44.64 |
| Poly-resistance |
13 |
23.22 |
Table 4.
Prevalence and distribution of katG and inhA exon mutations.
Table 4.
Prevalence and distribution of katG and inhA exon mutations.
| Gene |
Patients with mutations |
Percentage |
Total mutations detected |
|
katG only |
11 |
19.6% |
17 |
|
inhA only |
7 |
12.5% |
96 |
| Both katG and inhA
|
0 |
0% |
0 |
| No mutations detected |
38 |
67.9% |
0 |
Table 5.
Detailed analysis of katG exon mutations (n=11 patients).
Table 5.
Detailed analysis of katG exon mutations (n=11 patients).
| Codon Position |
Nucleotide Change |
Amino Acid Change |
Patients (n) |
% of katG-positive patients |
% of total mutations |
| 315 |
C>G |
Ser>Thr |
11 |
100.0 |
64.7 |
| 174 |
T>C |
Glu>Gly |
2 |
18.2 |
11.8 |
| 447 |
Multiple nucleotide |
Complex change* |
1 |
9.1 |
5.9 |
| 454 |
C>T |
Glu>Glu |
1 |
9.1 |
5.9 |
| 458 |
G>A/A>T |
Leu>Phe/Leu>Leu |
2 |
18.2 |
11.8 |
Table 6.
Detailed analysis of inhA exon mutations (n=7 patients).
Table 6.
Detailed analysis of inhA exon mutations (n=7 patients).
| Mutation Characteristic |
Number of Patients |
Percentage |
Number of Mutations |
Percentage of Total |
| Location |
|
|
|
|
| Codon cluster 233-240 |
7 |
100.0% |
37 |
42.5% |
| Other regions |
0 |
0% |
59 |
57.5% |
| Functional Impact |
|
|
|
|
| Amino acid changing (missense) |
7 |
100.0% |
63 |
65.6% |
| Silent mutations |
0 |
0% |
33 |
34.4% |
| Total mutations per patient |
|
|
|
|
| Range |
8-18 mutations per patient |
|
|
|
| Mean ± SD |
13.7 ± 4.2 mutations per patient |
|
|
|
Table 7.
Distribution of mutations by drug resistance patterns.
Table 7.
Distribution of mutations by drug resistance patterns.
| Resistance Pattern |
Total (n) |
katG mutations |
inhA mutations |
No mutations |
| INH mono-resistance |
18 |
3 (16.7%) |
0 (0%) |
15 (83.3%) |
| MDR-TB (INH + RIF) |
25 |
6 (24.0%) |
6 (24.0%) |
13 (52.0%) |
| Poly-resistance |
13 |
2 (15.4%) |
0 (0%) |
11 (84.6%) |
| P-value |
|
0.678 |
0.012 |
0.023 |
Table 8.
Clinical characteristics by mutation status.
Table 8.
Clinical characteristics by mutation status.
| Characteristic |
katG positive (n=11) |
inhA positive (n=7) |
No mutations (n=38) |
P-value |
| Demographics |
|
|
|
|
| Age (years), mean ± SD |
42.5 ± 16.6 |
39.4 ± 18.8 |
49.1 ± 17.5 |
>0.05 |
| Male gender, n (%) |
6 (54.5) |
4 (57.1) |
23 (60.5) |
>0.05 |
| BMI (kg/m2), mean ± SD |
20.2 ± 2.8 |
19.8 ± 1.5 |
19.5 ± 2.9 |
>0.05 |
| Clinical History |
|
|
|
|
| Previous TB treatment, n (%) |
3 (27.3) |
1 (14.3) |
10 (26.3) |
>0.05 |
| Diabetes mellitus, n (%) |
2 (18.2) |
1 (14.3) |
4 (10.5) |
>0.05 |
| Symptoms |
|
|
|
|
| Fever, n (%) |
5 (45.5) |
3 (42.9) |
11 (28.9) |
>0.05 |
| Persistent cough, n (%) |
11 (100.0) |
7 (100.0) |
36 (94.7) |
>0.05 |
| Hemoptysis, n (%) |
2 (18.2) |
4 (57.1) |
7 (18.4) |
0.067 |
| Dyspnea, n (%) |
4 (36.4) |
3 (42.9) |
11 (28.9) |
>0.05 |
| Chest pain, n (%) |
7 (63.6) |
4 (57.1) |
20 (52.6) |
>0.05 |
| Physical Examination |
|
|
|
|
| Pulmonary rales, n (%) |
10 (90.9) |
6 (85.7) |
13 (34.2) |
<0.001 |
| Weight loss, n (%) |
9 (81.8) |
6 (85.7) |
30 (78.9) |
>0.05 |
Table 9.
Paraclinical characteristics by mutation status.
Table 9.
Paraclinical characteristics by mutation status.
| Characteristic |
katG positive (n=11) |
inhA positive (n=7) |
No mutations (n=38) |
P-value |
| Radiological Findings |
|
|
|
|
| Cavitary lesions, n (%) |
3 (27.3) |
3 (42.9) |
16 (42.1) |
>0.05 |
| Bilateral involvement, n (%) |
4 (36.4) |
3 (42.9) |
20 (52.6) |
>0.05 |
| Upper lobe predominance, n (%) |
8 (72.7) |
5 (71.4) |
22 (57.9) |
>0.05 |
| Laboratory Results |
|
|
|
|
| AFB smear positive, n (%) |
5 (45.5) |
3 (42.9) |
18 (47.4) |
>0.05 |
| GeneXpert MTB positive, n (%) |
10 (90.9) |
6 (85.7) |
34 (89.5) |
>0.05 |
| Bacterial Load (AFB grade) |
|
|
|
|
| Scanty/1+, n (%) |
3 (27.3) |
2 (28.6) |
9 (23.7) |
>0.05 |
| 2+/3+, n (%) |
2 (18.2) |
1 (14.3) |
9 (23.7) |
>0.05 |
|
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).