Identification of pathogens from native urine samples by MALDI-TOF/TOF tandem mass spectrometry.
16S rRNA sequencing
MALDI-TOF/TOF
Pathogen identification
Proteomics
Sample preparation
Urine
Journal
Clinical proteomics
ISSN: 1542-6416
Titre abrégé: Clin Proteomics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101184586
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
10
05
2020
accepted:
17
06
2020
entrez:
26
6
2020
pubmed:
26
6
2020
medline:
26
6
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Reliable high-throughput microbial pathogen identification in human urine samples is crucial for patients with cystitis symptoms. Currently employed methods are time-consuming and could lead to unnecessary or inadequate antibiotic treatment. Purpose of this study was to assess the potential of mass spectrometry for uropathogen identification from a native urine sample. In total, 16 urine samples having more than 10 Here we present advantages and disadvantages of bottom-up proteomics, using MALDI-TOF/TOF tandem mass spectrometry, for culture-independent identification of uropathogens (e.g. directly from urine samples). The direct approach provided reliable identification of bacteria at the genus level in monobacterial samples. Taxonomic identifications obtained by proteomics were compared both to standard urine culture test used in clinics and genomic test based on 16S rRNA sequencing. Our findings indicate that mass spectrometry has great potential as a reliable high-throughput tool for microbial pathogen identification in human urine samples. In this case, the MALDI-TOF/TOF, was used as an analytical tool for the determination of bacteria in urine samples, and the results obtained emphasize high importance of storage conditions and sample preparation method impacting reliability of MS2 data analysis. The proposed method is simple enough to be utilized in existing clinical settings and is highly suitable for suspected single organism infectious etiologies. Further research is required in order to identify pathogens in polymicrobial urine samples.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Reliable high-throughput microbial pathogen identification in human urine samples is crucial for patients with cystitis symptoms. Currently employed methods are time-consuming and could lead to unnecessary or inadequate antibiotic treatment. Purpose of this study was to assess the potential of mass spectrometry for uropathogen identification from a native urine sample.
METHODS
METHODS
In total, 16 urine samples having more than 10
RESULTS
RESULTS
Here we present advantages and disadvantages of bottom-up proteomics, using MALDI-TOF/TOF tandem mass spectrometry, for culture-independent identification of uropathogens (e.g. directly from urine samples). The direct approach provided reliable identification of bacteria at the genus level in monobacterial samples. Taxonomic identifications obtained by proteomics were compared both to standard urine culture test used in clinics and genomic test based on 16S rRNA sequencing.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings indicate that mass spectrometry has great potential as a reliable high-throughput tool for microbial pathogen identification in human urine samples. In this case, the MALDI-TOF/TOF, was used as an analytical tool for the determination of bacteria in urine samples, and the results obtained emphasize high importance of storage conditions and sample preparation method impacting reliability of MS2 data analysis. The proposed method is simple enough to be utilized in existing clinical settings and is highly suitable for suspected single organism infectious etiologies. Further research is required in order to identify pathogens in polymicrobial urine samples.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32581661
doi: 10.1186/s12014-020-09289-4
pii: 9289
pmc: PMC7310424
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
25Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2020.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interest.
Références
J Proteomics. 2018 May 30;180:120-127
pubmed: 28705725
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2016 Jun;22(6):561.e1-6
pubmed: 26899829
Electrophoresis. 1999 Dec;20(18):3551-67
pubmed: 10612281
J Microbiol. 2018 Apr;56(4):209-216
pubmed: 29492868
ISME J. 2012 Mar;6(3):610-8
pubmed: 22134646
Eur Urol. 2015 Aug;68(2):173-4
pubmed: 25774008
Clin Chem. 2016 Jan;62(1):41-7
pubmed: 26553791
Nat Rev Urol. 2010 Dec;7(12):653-60
pubmed: 21139641
J Mol Evol. 2008 Jun;66(6):630-42
pubmed: 18504519
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2014 Feb 15;24(1):89-104
pubmed: 24627718
J Proteome Res. 2012 May 4;11(5):2710-20
pubmed: 22452665
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 10;10(12):e0144878
pubmed: 26658918
J Emerg Nurs. 2019 Sep;45(5):488-501
pubmed: 31445626
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015 Sep;34(9):1787-95
pubmed: 26054715
J Clin Lab Anal. 2018 Mar;32(3):
pubmed: 28737838
Nat Methods. 2016 Jul;13(7):581-3
pubmed: 27214047
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Apr;54(4):988-93
pubmed: 26818668
J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2003 Sep;14(9):931-42
pubmed: 12954162
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 May;54(5):1216-22
pubmed: 26962083
Clin Chim Acta. 2018 Sep;484:171-178
pubmed: 29803898
Microorganisms. 2019 May 13;7(5):
pubmed: 31086084
Syst Appl Microbiol. 2015 Jun;38(4):246-57
pubmed: 25933927
Front Microbiol. 2015 Aug 05;6:791
pubmed: 26300860
J Proteome Res. 2008 Sep;7(9):3708-17
pubmed: 18707158
PLoS One. 2016 Mar 08;11(3):e0150755
pubmed: 26954694
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2010 May;107(21):361-7
pubmed: 20539810
Clin Proteomics. 2018 Dec 22;15:42
pubmed: 30607141
Annu Rev Biochem. 2001;70:437-73
pubmed: 11395414
J Clin Microbiol. 2014 Mar;52(3):871-6
pubmed: 24371246
Arch Intern Med. 2000 Sep 11;160(16):2537-40
pubmed: 10979067
Nat Rev Urol. 2017 May;14(5):296-310
pubmed: 28248946
J Transl Med. 2015 Apr 08;13:111
pubmed: 25889401
Expert Rev Proteomics. 2016 Jun;13(6):609-26
pubmed: 27232439
J Proteomics. 2011 Sep 6;74(10):1842-51
pubmed: 21635977
Clin Chem. 2015 Jan;61(1):100-11
pubmed: 25278500
Sci Rep. 2015 Sep 23;5:14337
pubmed: 26395646
Sci Rep. 2017 Jun 13;7(1):3434
pubmed: 28611406
Mol Cell Proteomics. 2017 Jun;16(6):1052-1063
pubmed: 28420677
Theranostics. 2017 Jan 1;7(2):238-252
pubmed: 28042331
Proteomics Clin Appl. 2016 Apr;10(4):346-57
pubmed: 26751976
Can Urol Assoc J. 2011 Oct;5(5):316-22
pubmed: 22031610
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2010 Feb;48(2):289-92
pubmed: 19961394
Clin Ther. 2013 Jun;35(6):872-7
pubmed: 23623624
Clin Proteomics. 2014 Feb 25;11(1):7
pubmed: 24568099
J Microbiol Methods. 2006 Dec;67(3):574-81
pubmed: 16859787
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Nov;213(5):644-9
pubmed: 26003055
Microbiome. 2018 May 17;6(1):90
pubmed: 29773078
BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Nov 7;19(1):941
pubmed: 31699042
J Clin Microbiol. 1995 Jul;33(7):1954-6
pubmed: 7665682
Genome Biol. 2006;7(9):R80
pubmed: 16948836
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2011 Jul;17(7):1007-12
pubmed: 20718803
J Clin Microbiol. 2017 May;55(5):1488-1495
pubmed: 28249997
Nat Biotechnol. 2019 Aug;37(8):852-857
pubmed: 31341288
J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2018 Aug;29(8):1721-1737
pubmed: 29873019
Front Microbiol. 2019 Mar 20;10:462
pubmed: 30949137