Search PubMedSearch

PubMed · 38617326

Genomic adaptation in group B Streptococcus following intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis and childbirth.

Abstract

Through vaginal colonization, GBS causes severe outcomes including neonatal sepsis and meningitis. Although intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) has reduced neonatal disease rates, persistent GBS colonization has been observed in patients following prophylaxis. To determine whether IAP selects for genomic signatures that enhance GBS survival and persistence, a pangenome analysis was performed on 97 isolates from 58 participants before (prenatal) and after (postpartum) IAP/childbirth. Thirty-one of the 34 paired strains from participants with persistent colonization clustered together in the core gene phylogeny, suggesting that the strains recovered at the postpartum sampling were highly similar to those recovered at the prenatal visit. A core-gene mutation analysis identified mutations in 74% (n=23) of the 31 postpartum genomes when compared to the prenatal strains of the same multilocus sequence type recovered from the same individuals. Several strains had acquired mutations in the same colonization-associated genes, though two postpartum strains accounted for most of the mutations. These two outliers were classified as mutators based on high mutation rates and mutations within DNA repair system genes. Increased biofilm production was observed in half of the postpartum strains relative to the prenatal strains, which is supported by the presence of point mutations in genes associated with adherence. Together, these findings suggest that antibiotics may impose a selective pressure on GBS that selects for mutations and phenotypes that promote adaptation and survival in vivo. Enhanced survival in the genitourinary tract can lead to persistent colonization, increasing the likelihood of invasive disease in subsequent pregnancies and in newborns following IAP.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Macy E Pell, Heather M Blankenship, Jennifer A Gaddy, H Dele Davies, Shannon D Manning. 2025-07-26. Genomic adaptation in group B Streptococcus following intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis and childbirth.. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.01.587590

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article