Disease trends are driven by HIV co-infection and transmission of a few strains within narrow geographic niches.
During 2003–2009, the National Tuberculosis (TB) Laboratory Network in Argentina gave 830 patients a new diagnosis of multidrug-resistant (MDR) TB and 53 a diagnosis of extensively drug- resistant (XDR) TB. HIV co-infection was involved in nearly one third of these cases. Strain genotyping showed that 7 major clusters gathered 56% of patients within restricted geographic areas. The 3 largest clusters corresponded to epidemic MDR TB strains that have been undergoing transmission for >10 years. The indigenous M strain accounted for 29% and 40% of MDR and XDR TB cases, respectively. Drug-resistant TB trends in Argentina are driven by spread of a few strains in hotspots where the rate of HIV infection is high. To curb transmission, the national TB program is focusing stringent interventions in these areas by strengthening infection control in large hospitals and prisons, expediting drug resistance detection, and streamlining information-sharing systems between HIV and TB programs.
During the early 1990s, HIV-associated multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR TB) emerged in Argentina (
MDR TB emergence highlighted the need for a MDR/XDR TB surveillance system focused on incidence and transmission. In 2003, the National TB Laboratory Network launched a systematic registry of all incident MDR/XDR TB cases diagnosed throughout the country. The registry includes a genotype database for all MDR/XDR TB patients going back to the initial outbreaks and population studies. We present the findings of a 7-year follow-up study of MDR and XDR TB in Argentina, with emphasis on potential transmission events involving strains responsible for previous outbreaks.
Isolates from all patients with newly diagnosed MDR or XDR TB from January 2003 through December 2009 were included in the study (1 isolate per patient, collected at time of diagnosis). MDR TB was defined as disease caused by
Available demographic and clinical data were collected through the national TB laboratory network. A special effort was made to retrieve data from clinical records in special groups, i.e., XDR TB, patients in hotspot areas, and those in clusters with <6 bands in the IS6110 restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP). This research was approved by the research review board of the Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Administración Nacional de Laboratorios e Institutos de Salud (INEI ANLIS) “Carlos G. Malbran.”
On the basis of programmatic guidelines, DST was performed on isolates from patients at risk for drug resistance: patients with TB treatment failure and retreatment, HIV or other concomitant conditions, or exposure to drug-resistant TB in household, prison, or hospital. In Buenos Aires and Rosario, culture and DST are available to test virtually all persons with suspected TB who seek assistance at large referral treatment centers. In the rest of the country, persons not included in the high-risk group are highly unlikely to contract MDR TB. In all, ≈10,000 TB cases are reported annually in Argentina, of which ≈4,500 are diagnosed on the basis of a positive culture. Among cases that are culture-positive, ≈3,000 have isolates submitted for DST; MDR TB is diagnosed for 4% of these patients.
All available isolates underwent standard IS
For RFLP patterns with
We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses to determine factors associated with being in a cluster and being in a major cluster. The explanatory variables were patient age, country of birth, place of diagnosis, HIV status, previous TB treatment, and disease localization. Within the subgroup included in major clusters, we used logistic regression analysis to determine factors associated with being infected by the M strain. In this latter model, the explanatory variables were patient age, country of birth, HIV status, previous TB treatment, hospital exposure, and isolate drug resistance.
We divided patients into 3 age groups:
We applied 3 tests to assess the performance of the models: overall model fit, Hosmer & Lemeshow test, and receiver operating characteristic area under the curve. We considered a model to be adequate when values were: overall model fit p<0.2, Hosmer & Lemeshow test p>0.5, and area under the curve >0.70. We used the χ2 test for linear trends for assessing changes in the annual number of MDR TB patients in cluster M compared with changes in numbers in other major clusters. Statistical analyses were performed by using MedCalc version 12 software (MedCalc, Mariakerke, Belgium).
Genotyping was available for isolates from 787/830 (94.8%) newly diagnosed MDR TB patients registered during the study period (2003, 93.2%; 2004, 97.7%; 2005, 99.1%; 2006, 86.4%; 2007, 93.0%; 2008, 96.5%; 2009, 97.5%) (
Numbers of patients with newly diagnosed multidrug-resistant tuberculosis reported per year, grouped according to genotype analysis, Argentina, 2003–2009. Major cluster,
The 3 predominant genotype families were LAM (38.8%), Haarlem (36.3%), and T (13.9%). Other genotypes were S (2.8%), U (1.7%), Beijing (1.5%), X (0.9%), and Ural (0.4%); orphan genotypes accounted for 3.8%. Within the 3 predominant genotype families, the most frequent subfamilies were H2 (29.5%), LAM3 (16.4%), T1 (8.9%), LAM5 (6.6%), LAM9 (6.5%), and Tuscany (5.5%). Of 12 patients carrying Beijing genotypes, 1 was born in Indonesia, 7 in Peru, and 4 in South America with no information on country of birth.
Of 787 patients for whom isolate genotype was available, 438 (55.7%) fitted into 7 major clusters and 151 (19.2%) into 45 minor clusters; 198 (25.2%) harbored unique genotypes (
| Genotype | No. patients | Total no. (%) patients | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | ||
| Cluster M | 46 | 40 | 33 | 29 | 31 | 28 | 21 | 228 (29.0) |
| Cluster Ra | 13 | 6 | 19 | 12 | 15 | 14 | 10 | 89 (11.3) |
| Cluster Rb | 7 | 10 | 2 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 38 (4.8) |
| Cluster Pr | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 26 (3.3) |
| Cluster At | 3 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 7 | 21 (2.7) |
| Cluster Ob | 2 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 18 (2.3) |
| Cluster Os | 1 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 18 (2.3) |
| Minor cluster* | 25 | 24 | 19 | 18 | 10 | 24 | 31 | 151 (19.2) |
| Unique | 23 | 33 | 29 | 27 | 30 | 29 | 27 | 198 (25.2) |
| Total | 124 | 127 | 115 | 102 | 93 | 111 | 115 | 787 (100.0) |
*A total of 45 minor clusters were identified during the study period, each consisting of <15 new patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis.
| Characteristic | No. patients | % Patients in cluster | Unadjusted OR (95% CI) | Adjusted OR (95% CI)† | % Patients in major cluster‡ | Unadjusted OR (95% CI) | Adjusted OR (95% CI)§ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, y, n = 640 | |||||||
|
| 24 | 83.3 | 2.9 (0.9–8.9) | ND | 58.3 | 1.5 (0.6–3.6) | ND |
| 16–45 | 495 | 78.6 | 57.9 | 1.5 (1.0–2.2) | 1.0 (0.5–2.0) | ||
| >45 | 121 | 63.6 | 1 | 1 | 48.3 | 1 | 1 |
| Country of birth, n = 541 | |||||||
| Argentina | 412 | 80.1 | 66.7 | ||||
| Other | 129 | 61.2 | 1 | 1 | 20.9 | 1 | 1 |
| Place of diagnosis, n = 787 | |||||||
| Hotspot¶ | 634 | 77.9 | 1.6 (0.7–3.7) | 62.3 | |||
| Other | 153 | 62.1 | 1 | 1 | 28.1 | 1 | 1 |
| HIV status, n = 604 | |||||||
| Positive | 254 | 86.6 | 76.4 | ||||
| Negative | 350 | 70.9 | 1 | 1 | 49.4 | 1 | 1 |
| Previous TB, n = 557 | |||||||
| Yes | 313 | 71.9 | 0.7 (0.5–1.0) | 0.8 (0.5–1.5) | 51.8 | 0.7 (0.5–1.0) | 0.7 (0.4–1.2) |
| No | 244 | 79.1 | 1 | 1 | 59.4 | 1 | 1 |
| Site of disease, n = 775 | |||||||
| Pulmonary only | 698 | 74.1 | 0.6 (0.3–1.2) | 1.4 (0.5–4.2) | 55.0 | 0.8 (0.5–1.3) | 2.7 (1.1–7.0) |
| Other | 77 | 81.8 | 1 | 1 | 59.7 | 1 | 1 |
*
Characteristics of the 7 major clusters are described in
| Cluster (SIT)* | Area | Total no. case-patients | Risk factor, no. (%) case-patients | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Previously treated for TB | HIV positive | HCWs | Other hospital exposure† | Prison | Household exposure | Unknown | |||
| M H2 (2) | Buenos Aries | 228 | 78 (34.2) | 116 (50.9) | 21 (9.2) | 38 (16.7) | 23 (10.1) | 29 (12.7) | 19 (8.3) |
| Ra LAM3 (33) | Rosario | 89 | 40 (44.9) | 28 (31.5) | 2 (2.2) | 10 (11.2) | 17 (19.1) | 16 (18.0) | 14 (15.7) |
| Rb Tuscany (159) | Buenos Aries, Rosario | 38 | 11 (28.9) | 22 (57.9) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (2.6) | 0 (0.0) | 13‡ (34.2) | 6 (15.8) |
| Pr LAM9 (42) | Buenos Aries | 26 | 10 (38.5) | 10 (38.5) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (7.7) | 15 (57.7) | 5 (19.2) | 2 (7.7) |
| At T1 (53) | Atlantic Coast | 21 | 9 (42.9) | 7 (33.3) | 1 (4.8) | 3 (14.3) | 2 (9.5) | 7 (33.3) | 2 (9.5) |
| Ob LAM5 (725) | Buenos Aries | 18 | 7 (38.9) | 4 (22.2) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (11.1) | 3 (16.7) | 5 (27.8) | 2 (11.1) |
| Os LAM5 (93) | Salta | 18 | 7 (38.9) | 6 (33.3) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (16.7) | 1 (5.6) | 9 (50.0) | 2 (11.1) |
*Sum does not equal total because of patients with more than one risk factor. Buenos Aires includes the city and surroundings. MDR, multidrug-resistant; TB, tuberculosis; SIT, Shared International Spoligo Type according to Brudey et al. (
| Cluster | Total no. isolates | No. (%) isolates with additional resistance to | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 drugs | 1 drug | 2 drugs | |||
| M | 228 | 2 (0.9) | 13 (5.7) | 30 (13.2) | 183 (80.3) |
| Ra | 89 | 8 (9.0) | 61 (68.5) | 15 (16.9) | 5 (5.6) |
| Rb | 38 | 26 (68.4) | 6 (15.8) | 4 (10.5) | 2 (5.3) |
| Pr | 26 | 26 (100) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| At | 21 | 6 (28.6) | 5 (23.8) | 6 (28.6) | 4 (19.0) |
| Ob | 18 | 13 (72.2) | 0 | 3 (16.7) | 2 (11.1) |
| Os | 18 | 0 | 2 (11.1) | 5 (27.8) | 11 (61.1) |
*Additional drugs tested were streptomycin, ethambutol, pyrazinamide, kanamycin, amikacin, capreomycin, and ofloxacin.
IS
Locations of 7 major multidrug-resistant tuberculosis clusters, labeled by strain type, Argentina, 2003–2009.
The predominant cluster, M, was largely confined to the city of Buenos Aires and the surrounding area, with only 5/228 patients having MDR TB diagnosed elsewhere. Twenty patients in this cluster were immigrants from neighboring countries (Bolivia 11, Paraguay 6, Peru 2, Uruguay 1). Most patients had
| Characteristic | No. patients | % Patients in M cluster | Unadjusted OR (95% CI) | Adjusted OR (95% CI)† |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, y, n = 347 | ||||
| 16–45 | 288 | 50.7 | 0.9 (0.5–1.6) | 1.4 (0.5–4.3) |
| >45 | 59 | 52.5 | 1 | 1 |
| Country of birth, n = 302 | ||||
| Argentina | 275 | 51.0 | 0.7 (0.3–1.6) | 0.6 (0.1–2.3) |
| Other | 27 | 74.1 | 1 | 1 |
| HIV status, n = 360 | ||||
| Positive | 194 | 60.3 | 1.4 (0.6–3.3) | |
| Negative | 166 | 49.4 | 1 | 1 |
| Previous TB treatment, n = 304 | ||||
| Yes | 160 | 47.5 | 1.0 (0.7–1.6) | 0.8 (0.4–1.8) |
| No | 144 | 46.5 | 1 | 1 |
| Hospital exposure‡ | ||||
| Yes | 86 | 72.1 | 2.6 (1.0–6.8) | |
| No | 352 | 47.2 | 1 | 1 |
| Isolate resistant to | ||||
|
| 207 | 88.4 | ||
| <5 drugs | 231 | 19.5 | 1 | 1 |
*
Numbers of HIV-positive patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR TB), classified by genotype cluster, and total number of newly diagnosed MDR TB patients per year with identified genotype, Argentina, 2003–2009.
The second major cluster, Ra, was mainly limited to the overpopulated area of Rosario City and surroundings, another MDR TB hotspot (
XDR TB was newly diagnosed in 53 patients during 2003–2009. Of these patients, 37 first received a diagnosis of MDR TB during the same period, so these patients were included in the MDR and XDR TB groups. The other 16 XDR TB patients received a diagnosis of MDR TB before this period. The male:female ratio for XDR TB patients was 1.25:1; median age was 37.4 years (SD 11.6, range 21–72 years). Fifty-two patients were born in South America (Argentina 30, Bolivia 4, Peru 6, Paraguay 1, Brazil 1, undetermined 11), and 1 was born in Indonesia.
Characteristics of XDR TB patients related to clustering are described in
| Characteristic | No. patients | % In cluster | % In major cluster |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | |||
| M | 29 | 79.3 | 58.6 |
| F | 24 | 75.0 | 58.3 |
| Age group, y | |||
| 15–29 | 16 | 81.3 | 50.0 |
| 30–44 | 24 | 75.0 | 66.7 |
|
| 8 | 87.5 | 50.0 |
| Unknown (adult) | 5 | 60.0 | 60.0 |
| Country of birth | |||
| Argentina | 30 | 76.7 | 53.3 |
| Other (South America)† | 11 | 81.8 | 63.6 |
| Unknown (South America)‡ | 11 | 81.8 | 72.7 |
| Indonesia | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Place of diagnosis | |||
| Former MDR TB hot spot | 31 | 74.2 | 71.0 |
| Other | 22 | 81.8 | 40.9 |
| HIV status | |||
| Positive | 14 | 85.7 | 78.6 |
| Negative | 33 | 75.8 | 54.5 |
| Unknown | 6 | 66.7 | 33.3 |
| Site of disease | |||
| Pulmonary | 49 | 81.6 | 61.2 |
| Disseminated | 3 | 33.3 | 33.3 |
| Unknown | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Previous TB | |||
| Yes | 38 | 71.1 | 50.0 |
| No | 10 | 90.0 | 70.0 |
| Unknown | 5 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| AFB smear microscopy | |||
| Positive | 41 | 78.0 | 56.1 |
| Negative | 7 | 71.4 | 57.1 |
| Unknown | 5 | 75.0 | 75.0 |
*TB, tuberculosis; MDR, multidrug-resistant; AFB, acid-fast bacilli. †From a country in South America other than Argentina ‡From an unknown country in South America.
| Genotype | No. patients in year | Total no. (%) patients | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | ||
| Cluster M | 5 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 21 (39.6) |
| Cluster Rb | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 (1.9) |
| Cluster At | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 (3.8) |
| Cluster Os | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 7 (13.2) |
| Minor cluster* | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 11 (20.8) |
| Unique pattern | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 11 (20.8) |
| Total | 9 | 8 | 12 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 53 (100.0) |
*Cluster of <15 patients with newly diagnosed multidrug-resistant tuberculosis during the study period
The annual number of newly diagnosed MDR and XDR TB cases decreased slightly, with minor fluctuations, during the study period. HIV infection was associated with almost one third of MDR TB cases; this proportion is 2–4× higher than that attributed by different studies to all forms of TB in the country (
All 7 major clusters in our study were connected with particular geographic areas, institutional settings, or both. Furthermore, most patients in these clusters underwent TB treatment in health centers that had ongoing MDR TB transmission or had a household or a prison contact with persons who had MDR TB. These findings indicate that these major clusters represent true transmission events.
Many cases in this outbreak were caused by the M strain, an apparently autochthonous outbreak genotype. In a countrywide survey performed in 1998, this strain was found to be responsible for 42% of all MDR TB cases but was confined to the metropolitan area of Buenos Aires (National TB Laboratory Network, unpub. data). Since then, the M strain has been the most frequently identified in every MDR TB investigation performed in the country. We found the M strain to be the most prevalent and that its transmission was virtually restricted to the area of the initial outbreak. However, its numbers decreased by more than half within the study period, particularly among HIV-infected patients, which suggests that the epidemic curve of the M strain has entered a declining phase. The other 2 strains associated with previous MDR TB outbreaks, Ra and Rb, were found to persist with lower, fluctuating frequencies.
The expansion of M strain transmission in Argentina was initially fostered by clinical mismanagement. During the early 1990s, patients with advanced AIDS were hospitalized in large, referral treatment centers, where they shared facilities with patients who had MDR TB. At that time, virtually no respiratory protection policy was in force because it was wrongly assumed that MDR TB patients were barely infectious. After genotyping confirmed outbreaks of MDR TB among the patients with AIDS (
The national
Different
A small number of patients affected by the M strain were immigrants from neighboring countries who had settled in Buenos Aires. Cross-border and domestic migration toward large metropolitan areas is a long-observed demographic and public health concern in Argentina. More than 80% of the patients in this study were assisted in metropolises designated as MDR TB hotspots. Even though immigrants with TB have access to higher quality health care in these areas than in other parts of the country, they are also at higher risk of becoming newly infected with an outbreak MDR TB strain.
The M strain was overrepresented among patients with XDR TB; isolate resistance to
Drug-resistance profiles were not uniform within the M strain clusters. The variations in susceptibility to individual drugs reflect the existence of various ongoing chains of transmission, some of which might have started before, or simultaneously with, the first documented outbreak. One limitation of our study is the failure to identify individual chains. Factors that precluded the reliable characterization of subclusters were the long time elapsed since the outbreak onset, the insufficient epidemiologic documentation in many cases, and the unavailability of additional molecular markers.
Our study has another major limitation. Incomplete demographic and clinical data on patients were retrieved, and several observations had missing values. If missing values were systematically associated with a given force or factor, results presented here would be biased. We are not aware of any association of missing values with the dependent variables under study and assume that those data were missing at random. Missing values may have affected the analyses by reducing the number of observations, which may have reduced the power of the model to detect significant associations but without necessarily biasing the associations reported. However, the possibility that bias might have resulted from missing data cannot be ruled out. Therefore, statistical significances of our analyses should be interpreted cautiously.
In the MDR TB hotspots in Argentina, the distinction between primary and acquired MDR TB on the basis of a history of previous TB treatment was not decisive because patients could have been exposed to hospital-associated MDR TB infection while being treated for community-acquired TB. This fact could explain why clustering was not more frequent among patients without previous TB treatment in our study.
The national TB network includes all the laboratories performing bacteriological TB diagnosis in the country; therefore, the patients in this study represent all newly diagnosed MDR TB cases in Argentina. The structure, geographic coverage, and personnel of the TB laboratory network are adequate to provide DST for all patients at risk for MDR TB in Argentina. However, a few MDR TB patients might remain undiagnosed because of operational factors, e.g., inefficient detection of risk factors, insufficient or delayed requests for DST, and disorganized information systems.
The geographically restricted distribution of successful MDR TB genotypes that we found has public health implications. As a result of this study, specific interventions are being reinforced, particularly in the MDR TB hotspots: implementing universal culture and strategies to expedite drug resistance detection; decentralizing specialized health care; streamlining information-sharing systems between HIV and TB programs; and strengthening administrative infection control measures in prisons and large hospitals with high TB infection load. A national advisory group on MDR TB clinical management has also been recently created. Control interventions have already started to reduce MDR TB spread in the hospital that was the epicenter of the main outbreak (
Additional members of the National TB Laboratory Network who contributed data are listed at the end of this article.
On behalf of TB laboratory network, the following persons contributed substantially to this work: D. Ballester, L. Casimir, M. Gutiérrez, M. Hoffman, S. Kaufman, N. Kempf, G. Ojea, A. Procopio (Buenos Aires City); M.I. Anganuzzi, V. Delle Donne, T. Hernández, A. Mariñansky, N. Morcillo, S. Morla, A. Reniero, L. Rivas, A. Rossetti, A. Togneri, A. Zapata (Buenos Aires Province); M.I. Gigli, C. Pellegrini (Santa Fe); M. Cisneros (Salta); M.C. Cosiansi, L. Wolff (Córdoba); G. Bichara (Tucumán); M. Pacce (Corrientes), V. Carrió (San Juan); M. Fantín (Formosa); H. Rousselle (Mendoza); R. Piloni (Misiones); G. Torres (Neuquén), M. Gunia (Chaco); E. Fernández (Chubut); L. Casali (Catamarca); O. Belforte (Santa Cruz); N. Blázquez (Río Negro); and G. Jacquier (Sistema Penitenciario).
We thank Andrés M. Pérez for valuable advice on statistical analysis.
This work was supported by FonCyT, Argentina (project PAE-PICT2323), and the EC under contract HEALTH-F3_2007-201690 (FAST-XDR-DETECT).
Dr Ritacco is a scientist at the Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Argentina. Her main research interests are molecular epidemiology and molecular diagnosis of tuberculosis.