Back

Rapidly and reproducibly building a comprehensive catalogueof resistance-associated variants for M. tuberculosis

Adlard, D.; Malone, K. M.; Westhead, J.; Hunt, M.; Thai, H.; Colpus, M.; Turner, R. D.; Omar, S. V.; Eyre, D. W.; Ismail, N.; Walker, T. M.; Peto, T. E.; Crook, D. W.; Iqbal, Z.; Fowler, P. W.

2025-11-20 microbiology
10.1101/2025.10.02.679941 bioRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundCatalogues of genetic variants associated with resistance underpin whole-genome sequencing (WGS)-based predictions of drug susceptibility in Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and are essential for molecular diagnostics and surveillance. The current gold standard catalogues are those released by the WHO but the underlying data are not fully released and they are difficult to interpret. Open and reproducible methods would help address these problems, extending the important work already done. MethodsWe have developed an automated method, catomatic, that uses a binomial test to associate informative isolates with resistance or susceptibility, and built a catalogue (catomatic-1) from the same 39,358 samples used to construct the first edition of the WHO catalogue (WHOv1). We performed a sensitivity analysis to optimise statistical and bioinformatic parameters for each drug, and benchmarked catomatic-1 against WHOv1 using an independent Validation Dataset of 14,380 isolates. FindingsBy using simpler statistics, catomatic-1 algorithmically classified 1,329 genetic variants, ranging from five for linezolid to 440 for pyrazinamide. WHOv1 included generalisable rules added by a panel of experts, increasing its predictive coverage, but at the cost of reproducibility. Despite not including such expert rules, catomatic-1 achieves comparable performance for all drugs, with sensitivities for first-line agents above 88% on the independent Validation Dataset. The automated process allowed us to efficiently explore parameter space; for instance, detecting resistant variants with low read support improved the sensitivity for all drugs. InterpretationPerformant resistance catalogues for M. tuberculosis can be built automatically using transparent and reproducible statistical methods. As more data are collected, catalogue content and performance will evolve, highlighting the need for proper versioning, machine/human readability, and open access. This approach demonstrates resistance catalogues used in surveillance and diagnostics can be rapidly and reproducibily updated. FundingThe National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), Engineering and Physics Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and ORACLE Corporation. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed and preprint servers (bioRxiv, medRxiv), and publicly available mutation catalogues for studies linking Mycobacterium tuberculosis genomic variants with drug resistance using whole-genome or targeted sequencing and phenotypic drug-susceptibility testing (pDST). Search terms combined "Mycobacterium tuberculosis", "genome sequencing", "mutation catalogue", "mutation effects", "drug resistance", and individual drug names, with no language or date restriction. We included studies providing paired, clinical genomic and pDST or MIC data, excluding purely in-silico or case-only reports. This work directly builds on methodologies and data published by five prior studies, and makes primary comparisons with the First (WHOv1) and Second (WHOv2) Editions of the WHO Catalogue of mutations in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Added value of this studyWe developed catomatic, a transparent, reproducible tool for building catalogues of resistance- and susceptibility-associated genetic variants. Trained on the same samples used to build WHOv1 and benchmarked on an independent Validation Dataset, catomatic achieves comparable sensitivity, specificity, and definitive prediction rates to WHOv1 without expert-rule augmentation and despite using simpler statistics. It optimises parameters per drug, produces machine-readable outputs (CSV/JSON), and demonstrates that adjusting read-support thresholds can improve detection of minor resistance subpopulations. Implications of all the available evidenceCatalogues of resistance-associated variants for M. tuberculosis can be rapidly and transparently constructed. Making catalogues available in human/machine-readable formats with uncertainty estimates will improve uptake of WGS for M. tuberculosis surveillance and diagnostics; using a reproducible process permits diagnostic test manufacturers, researchers, clinical and public health laboratories to select the level of statistical support necessitated by their specific use-case, Policymakers should balance the benefits of expert rules against loss of reproducibility. Future work will expand the size of the datasets used, integrate minimum inhibitory concentration data, and establish consensus workflows for routine, transparent catalogue updates.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 6%
22.2%
2
npj Antimicrobials and Resistance
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
15.3%
3
The Lancet Microbe
44 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.9%
4
eBioMedicine
183 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.1%
5
Nature Microbiology
155 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
6
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 31%
3.5%
7
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
130 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.7%
8
Microbial Genomics
225 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.7%
9
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 39%
2.7%
10
Genome Medicine
183 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
11
Journal of Infection
78 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.8%
12
JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
13
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 14%
1.7%
14
Microbiology Spectrum
469 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.5%
15
Nucleic Acids Research
1281 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.5%
16
PLOS Pathogens
820 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.1%
17
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 17%
1.1%
18
Nature
645 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.1%
19
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 34%
1.1%
20
Genome Biology
637 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.1%
21
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
187 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
22
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 27%
1.1%
23
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 29%
1.1%
24
Nature Medicine
125 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
25
Cell Reports Medicine
153 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
26
Genome Research
468 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
27
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
46 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
28
Cell Systems
201 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
29
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 60%
0.9%
30
The Lancet Respiratory Medicine
19 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%