MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033862776 · doi:10.1016/s2666-5247(20)30038-0

Reconsidering Mycobacterium bovis as a proxy for zoonotic tuberculosis: a molecular epidemiological surveillance study

2020· article· en· W3033862776 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Shannon C. Duffy, Sreenidhi Srinivasan, Megan A. Schilling, Tod Stuber, Sarah N Danchuk, Joy S. Michael, Manigandan Venkatesan, Nitish Bansal, Sushila Maan, Naresh Jindal, Deepika Chaudhary, Premanshu Dandapat, Robab Katani, Shubhada K. Chothe, Maroudam Veerasami, Suelee Robbe‐Austerman, Nicholas Juleff, Vivek Kapur, Marcel A. Behr

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Microbe · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsTuberculosisMycobacterium tuberculosis complexMycobacterium bovisMycobacterium tuberculosisPopulationBiologyMolecular epidemiologyVeterinary medicineVirologyMicrobiologyMedicineGenotypeGeneticsEnvironmental healthGenePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Zoonotic tuberculosis is defined as human infection with Mycobacterium bovis . Although globally, India has the largest number of human tuberculosis cases and the largest cattle population, in which bovine tuberculosis is endemic, the burden of zoonotic tuberculosis is unknown. The aim of this study was to obtain estimates of the human prevalence of animal-associated members of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) at a large referral hospital in India. Methods We did a molecular epidemiological surveillance study of 940 positive mycobacteria growth indicator tube (MGIT) cultures, collected from patients visiting the outpatient department at Christian Medical College (Vellore, India) with suspected tuberculosis between Oct 1, 2018, and March 31, 2019. A PCR-based approach was applied to subspeciate cultures. Isolates identified as MTBC other than M tuberculosis or as inconclusive on PCR were subject to whole-genome sequencing (WGS), and phylogenetically compared with publicly available MTBC sequences from south Asia. Sequences from WGS were deposited in the National Center for Biotechnology Information Sequence Read Archive, accession number SRP226525 (BioProject database number PRJNA575883). Findings The 940 MGIT cultures were from 548 pulmonary and 392 extrapulmonary samples. A conclusive identification was obtained for all 940 isolates; wild-type M bovis was not identified. The isolates consisted of M tuberculosis (913 [97·1%] isolates), Mycobacterium orygis (seven [0·7%]), M bovis BCG (five [0·5%]), and non-tuberculous mycobacteria (15 [1·6%]). Subspecies were assigned for 25 isolates by WGS, which were analysed against 715 MTBC sequences from south Asia. Among the 715 genomes, no M bovis was identified. Four isolates of cattle origin were dispersed among human sequences within M tuberculosis lineage 1, and the seven M orygis isolates from human MGIT cultures were dispersed among sequences from cattle. Interpretation M bovis prevalence in humans is an inadequate proxy of zoonotic tuberculosis. The recovery of M orygis from humans highlights the need to use a broadened definition, including MTBC subspecies such as M orygis , to investigate zoonotic tuberculosis. The identification of M tuberculosis in cattle also reinforces the need for One Health investigations in countries with endemic bovine tuberculosis. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Canadian Institutes for Health Research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations94
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet MicrobeSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207