Detection of Pathogens and Antimicrobial Resistance Genes Directly from Urine Samples in Patients Suspected of Urinary Tract Infection by Metagenomics Nanopore Sequencing: A Large-Scale Multi-Centre Study

Manjiao Liu,Simin Yang,Susheng Wu,Li Chen,Shan Li,Zhenzhong Li,Mingzhe Zhou,Lili Wang,Hui Xu,Ryon Liu,Yi Fang,Weichun Huang,Min Zhang,Wenzheng Guo,Yan Dai,Yong Ren,Hao Guo,Wenjuan Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ctm2.824

IF: 8.554

2023-01-01

Clinical and Translational Medicine

Abstract:Clinical and Translational MedicineVolume 13, Issue 4 e824 LETTER TO THE EDITOROpen Access Detection of pathogens and antimicrobial resistance genes directly from urine samples in patients suspected of urinary tract infection by metagenomics nanopore sequencing: A large-scale multi-centre study Manjiao Liu, Manjiao Liu State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorSimin Yang, Simin Yang Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorSusheng Wu, Susheng Wu State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorLi Chen, Li Chen State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorShan Li, Shan Li State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorZhenzhong Li, Zhenzhong Li State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorMingzhe Zhou, Mingzhe Zhou State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, School of Life Science, Fudan University, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorLili Wang, Lili Wang Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorHui Xu, Hui Xu State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorRyon Liu, Ryon Liu State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYi Fang, Yi Fang Department of Laboratory Medicine, Huadong Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorWeichun Huang, Weichun Huang Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai Children's Medical Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorMin Zhang, Min Zhang Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorWenzheng Guo, Wenzheng Guo Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYan Dai, Yan Dai State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYong Ren, Corresponding Author Yong Ren [email protected] State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Correspondence Yong Ren and Hao Guo, State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210042, P. R. China. Email: [email protected] and [email protected] Wenjuan Wu, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200123, P. R. China. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorHao Guo, Corresponding Author Hao Guo [email protected] State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Correspondence Yong Ren and Hao Guo, State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210042, P. R. China. Email: [email protected] and [email protected] Wenjuan Wu, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200123, P. R. China. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorWenjuan Wu, Corresponding Author Wenjuan Wu [email protected] Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. China Correspondence Yong Ren and Hao Guo, State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210042, P. R. China. Email: [email protected] and [email protected] Wenjuan Wu, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200123, P. R. China. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author Manjiao Liu, Manjiao Liu State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorSimin Yang, Simin Yang Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorSusheng Wu, Susheng Wu State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorLi Chen, Li Chen State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorShan Li, Shan Li State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorZhenzhong Li, Zhenzhong Li State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorMingzhe Zhou, Mingzhe Zhou State Key Laboratory of Genetic Engineering, School of Life Science, Fudan University, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorLili Wang, Lili Wang Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorHui Xu, Hui Xu State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorRyon Liu, Ryon Liu State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYi Fang, Yi Fang Department of Laboratory Medicine, Huadong Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorWeichun Huang, Weichun Huang Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai Children's Medical Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorMin Zhang, Min Zhang Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorWenzheng Guo, Wenzheng Guo Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYan Dai, Yan Dai State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. ChinaSearch for more papers by this authorYong Ren, Corresponding Author Yong Ren [email protected] State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Correspondence Yong Ren and Hao Guo, State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210042, P. R. China. Email: [email protected] and [email protected] Wenjuan Wu, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200123, P. R. China. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorHao Guo, Corresponding Author Hao Guo [email protected] State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Nanjing Simcere Medical Laboratory Science Co., Ltd., Nanjing, P. R. China Correspondence Yong Ren and Hao Guo, State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210042, P. R. China. Email: [email protected] and [email protected] Wenjuan Wu, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200123, P. R. China. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this authorWenjuan Wu, Corresponding Author Wenjuan Wu [email protected] Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, P. R. China Correspondence Yong Ren and Hao Guo, State Key Laboratory of Translational Medicine and Innovative Drug Development, Jiangsu Simcere Diagnostics Co., Ltd., Nanjing 210042, P. R. China. Email: [email protected] and [email protected] Wenjuan Wu, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200123, P. R. China. Email: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author First published: 26 April 2023 https://doi.org/10.1002/ctm2.824 Manjiao Liu, Simin Yang and Susheng Wu contributed equally to this work. AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Dear Editor, Previous studies using metagenomics nanopore sequencing to detect pathogens and/or antimicrobial resistant (AMR) genes for urinary tract infection (UTI) had small sample sizes and only focused on UTI caused by bacteria.1, 2 Besides, the bioinformatics pipeline was not optimized. In this study, we optimized the metagenomics nanopore sequencing and bioinformatics pipeline suitable for detecting pathogens and AMR genes from urine samples. We enrolled 1045 samples from four hospitals to assess the pathogen detection, UTI diagnosis and AMR gene detection performance of the pipeline (Figure S1, Tables S1 and S2). We developed the wet-lab pipeline by adjusting the amount of saponin and the PCR system based on a previously published pipeline.3 The limits of detections for three common UTI pathogens were determined using spike-in samples, and precision test results confirmed the stability and repeatability of the methods (Table S3). To accurately detect pathogens and filter out false-positive results, a multi-step workflow using parameters, including blast cut-off, second best match reads ratio, minimal reads and RPK (reads per thousand sequence reads), was proposed (see Supporting Information for detail). We first assessed the performance of nanopore sequencing using 845 samples collected from Shanghai East Hospital. For pathogen detection, we used two reference standards: (1) a clinical culture gold standard and (2) a composite standard incorporated additional results from qPCR. We randomly divided the samples into a training set (n = 199 samples) and a validation set (n = 646 samples). Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were developed at varying RPK values for the training set using the two standards (Figure 1A,B). The ROC curve for training set was used to obtain the optimal thresholds that maximized the Youden index; then the scoring algorithm proposed by Gu4 was used to calculate sensitivity and specificity. In the validation set, using the urine culture standard, the sensitivity for bacterial and fungal detection was 89.8% and 96.3%, respectively; the specificity was 76.9% and 90.1%, respectively (Figure 1C). Using the composite standard, the sensitivity for bacterial and fungal detection was 98.4% and 98.2%, respectively; the specificity for bacterial and fungal detection was 85.4% and 98.1%, respectively (Figure 1C). In all 845 samples, the performance was equivalent to that in the validation set (Figure 1D). A total of 823 samples with clear clinical diagnostic information (758 UTIs and 65 non-UTIs) were used for diagnostic performance assessment (Table S4). Nanopore sequencing obtained a significantly higher sensitivity for UTI diagnosis compared with urine culture (87.86% vs. 81.66%, p < .01), although the specificity was lower than that of urine culture (84.61% vs. 100%, p < .01) (Figure 1E,F). Among the 90 nanopore sequencing false negative samples, 80 samples were weakly positive (pathogen reads were detected but not reached the thresholds), and the remaining 10 samples had few microbial reads (Figure S2A, Table S5). Among 10 nanopore sequencing false-positive samples, 6 samples were likely to reflect latent infections, because they came from patients with risk factors for UTI and clinical symptoms (Figure S2B). Furthermore, the detection frequency of mixed infection in UTI (with two or more organisms) of nanopore sequencing was much higher than that of urine culture (33.51% vs. 5.81%, p < .01) (Figure 1G and Table S6). Subanalysis showed that UTI diagnosis sensitivity and specificity of nanopore sequencing were higher in females compared to males (Figure S3). FIGURE 1Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Pathogen detection and urinary tract infection (UTI) diagnosis performance of nanopore sequencing: (A) receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves of training set for bacterial and fungal detections using clinical gold standard. Plots show nanopore-sequencing test sensitivity and specificity, relative to the urine culture, at reads per thousand sequence reads (RPK) threshold values ranging from .1 to 1000; (B) ROC curves of training sets for bacterial and fungal detection using composite standard; (C) contingency tables for validation set; (D) contingency tables for all 845 samples; (E) comparison of metagenomics nanopore sequencing and urine culture detection results in UTI and non-UTI groups; (F) contingency tables show the diagnostic performance of urine culture and nanopore sequencing for UTI and non-UTI differentiating. PPV: positive predictive value; NPV: negative predictive value; pos: positive; neg: negative; (G) barplots show the distribution of samples with single organism or two or more organisms detected by culture and metagenomics nanopore sequencing. Next, we validated the pathogen detection performance of metagenomics nanopore sequencing in other three hospitals. For bacteria detection, using composite standard, the sensitivity was 98.9%, 97.6% and 95.4%, respectively; the specificity was 68.3%, 79.7% and 76.3%, respectively (Figure 2). For fungal detection, using composite standard, the sensitivity was 100%, 100% and 85.7%, respectively; the specificity was 96.7%, 98.4% and 97.4%, respectively (Figure 2). The concordance between nanopore sequencing and urine culture in sample level is shown in Figure S4A,B. In samples with inconsistent nanopore sequencing and culture results, concordance between nanopore and qPCR is shown in Figure S4C. FIGURE 2Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Test performance of metagenomics nanopore sequencing in three validation hospitals and all 1045 samples. For comparison in pathogen level, as shown in Figure 3, nanopore sequencing improved the detection of common UTI pathogens, such as Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecium and Candida albicans, as well as pathogens that are difficult to culture or rare in UTIs, such as Enterococcus hirae5 and Salmonella enterica.6 The most commonly detected pathogens were generally consistent among the four centres and in agreement with previous studies7 (Figure S5). FIGURE 3Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Comparison of nanopore sequencing and urine culture in terms of pathogens. The top 20 frequently detected bacteria and all fungi species detected are listed with their corresponding frequencies plotted in histograms. OR and p values from Fisher's exact test are shown for pathogens with significantly different detection rates between nanopore sequencing and urine culture. We developed an in-house pipeline “NanoAMR” to determine the exact AMR gene subtype. Testing using simulated data showed that when the genomic depth was above 20×; NanoAMR could detect AMR gene subtype accurately (Table S7). Then we performed AMR gene detection in samples with antibiotic susceptibility testing results available. In 239 of 317 samples showed resistance or mediation to at least one type of drug we tested; corresponding resistance genes were detected by nanopore sequencing (Table S8). The incidence of UTIs caused by Enterobacterales species, with extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-positive or carbapenem-resistant (CR) phenotype is increasing and poses a heavy burden on the hospital environment.8, 9 Therefore, we then focused on the detection of genes related to carbapenem resistance and ESBL-positive phenotype in E. coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae (Figure 4). For E. coli, nanopore sequencing detected blaNDM genes in two of three urine samples exhibiting the CR phenotype. Nanopore sequencing detected blaCTX-M genes in 37 of the 43 samples exhibiting ESBL-positive phenotype, most commonly blaCTX-M-14. For K. pneumoniae, in agreement with the phenotypes, blaKPC genes were detected in the six urine samples exhibiting serine enzyme–producing phenotype, and blaNDM-5 was detected in the one urine sample exhibiting MBLs-producing phenotype. BlaSHV or blaCTX-M was detected by nanopore sequencing in all five urine samples exhibiting ESBL-positive phenotype (Figure 4). These results showed that nanopore sequencing could detect the corresponding AMR genes for E. coli and K. pneumoniae exhibiting CR- or ESBL-producing phenotype with high sensitivity, especially for K. pneumoniae, the sensitivity reached 100% in 12 samples (Tables S9 and S10). FIGURE 4Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Detection of beta-lactamase genes related to carbapenem resistance and extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-positive phenotype in Escherichia coli (A) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (B): (A) top panel, results of antibiotic susceptibility tests for cultivated E. coli isolates; bottom panel, beta-lactamase genes distribution in carbapenem-resistant (CR), ESBL-positive (ESBL-pos) and ESBL-negative (ESBL-neg) E. coli groups; (B) top panel, enzyme detection results for cultivated K. pneumoniae isolates; middle panel, results of antibiotic susceptibility tests for cultivated K. pneumoniae isolates; bottom panel, beta-lactamase genes distribution in CR, ESBL-positive (ESBL-pos) and ESBLs-negative (ESBL-neg) K. pneumoniae groups. (A and B) IPM, imipenem; MEM, meropenem; FEP, cefepime; ETP, ertapenem; SCF, cefperazone–sulbactam; CAZ, ceftazidime; CTX, cefotaxime; CRO, ceftriaxone; CXM, cefuroxime; CZO, cephazolin; ATM, aztreonam; TZP, piperacillin–tazobactam; SAM, ampicillin-sulbactam; AMP, ampicillin; PEN, penicillin; CEP, cephalosporin; CAR, carbapenem. In summary, we optimized metagenomics nanopore sequencing and bioinformatics pipeline suitable for detecting pathogens and AMR genes directly from urine samples within 10 h and assessed the performance of the methods in large-scale samples. Notably, in-house bioinformatics pipelines enable AMR gene detection with high sensitivity directly from urine, thus enabling clinicians to adjust antimicrobial therapy in a timely manner. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank Bo Zheng from Peking University First Hospital to provide part of samples. We thank Shuilian Zhou, Linlin Yan and Bei Zhang for helpful discussions and technical support. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT The authors declare no potential conflict of interest. Open Research DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT The FASTQ data for this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Codes for bioinformatics analysis are available in https://github.com/simceredx22/simNanoUTI. Supporting Information Filename Description ctm2824-sup-0001-SuppMat.docx65.9 KB Supporting Information ctm2824-sup-0002-tables.xlsx483.4 KB Supporting Information ctm2824-sup-0003-figureslegends.docx13.7 KB Supporting Information ctm2824-sup-0004-figureS1.pdf289.2 KB Supporting Information ctm2824-sup-0005-figureS2.pdf176.4 KB Supporting Information ctm2824-sup-0006-figureS3.pdf248.1 KB Supporting Information ctm2824-sup-0007-figureS4.pdf64.2 KB Supporting Information ctm2824-sup-0008-figureS5.pdf216.3 KB Supporting Information ctm2824-sup-0009-figureS6.pdf117.3 KB Supporting Information ctm2824-sup-0010-figureS7.pdf233.5 KB Supporting Information Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article. REFERENCES 1Schmidt K, Mwaigwisya S, Crossman LC, et al. Identification of bacterial pathogens and antimicrobial resistance directly from clinical urines by nanopore-based metagenomic sequencing. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017; 72: 104- 114. 2Zhang L, Huang W, Zhang S, et al. Rapid detection of bacterial pathogens and antimicrobial resistance genes in clinical urine samples with urinary tract infection by metagenomic nanopore sequencing. Front Microbiol. 2022; 13:858777. 3Charalampous T, Kay GL, Richardson H, et al. Nanopore metagenomics enables rapid clinical diagnosis of bacterial lower respiratory infection. Nat Biotechnol. 2019; 37: 783- 792. 4Gu W, Deng X, Lee M, et al. Rapid pathogen detection by metagenomic next-generation sequencing of infected body fluids. Nat Med. 2021; 27: 115- 124. 5Bilek HC, Deveci A, Unal S, Tanriverdi Cayci Y, Tanyel E. Enterococcus hirae as a cause of bacteremic urinary tract infection: first case report from Turkey. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2020; 14: 1780- 1482. 6Mellon G, Delanoe C, Roux AL, et al. Non-typhi Salmonella enterica urinary tract infections. Med Mal Infect. 2017; 47: 389- 393. 7Neugent ML, Hulyalkar NV, Nguyen VH, Zimmern PE, De Nisco NJ. Advances in understanding the human urinary microbiome and its potential role in urinary tract infection. mBio. 2020; 11: e00218- 20. 8Miftode IL, Nastase EV, Miftode RS, et al. Insights into multidrug-resistant K. pneumoniae urinary tract infections: from susceptibility to mortality. Exp Ther Med. 2021; 22: 1086. 9Karlowsky JA, Hoban DJ, Hackel MA, Lob SH, Sahm DF. Antimicrobial susceptibility of Gram-negative ESKAPE pathogens isolated from hospitalized patients with intra-abdominal and urinary tract infections in Asia-Pacific countries: sMART 2013–2015. J Med Microbiol. 2017; 66: 61- 69. Volume13, Issue4April 2023e824 FiguresReferencesRelatedInformation