Infection and Drug Resistance ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/didr20 Antimicrobial Resistance Levels of Non-Tuberculous Bacteria Isolates from Sputum of TB Patients in Ghana Portia Abena Morgan, Desmond Opoku Ntiamoah, Prince Asare, Ishaque Siam Mintah, Stephen Osei-Wusu, Augustine Asare Boadu, Emelia Konadu Danso, Ivy Naa Koshie Lamptey, Emmanuel Afreh, Amanda Tetteh, Adwoa Asante-Poku, Isaac Darko Otchere & Dorothy Yeboah-Manu To cite this article: Portia Abena Morgan, Desmond Opoku Ntiamoah, Prince Asare, Ishaque Siam Mintah, Stephen Osei-Wusu, Augustine Asare Boadu, Emelia Konadu Danso, Ivy Naa Koshie Lamptey, Emmanuel Afreh, Amanda Tetteh, Adwoa Asante-Poku, Isaac Darko Otchere & Dorothy Yeboah-Manu (2024) Antimicrobial Resistance Levels of Non-Tuberculous Bacteria Isolates from Sputum of TB Patients in Ghana, Infection and Drug Resistance, , 5663-5673, DOI: 10.2147/IDR.S483529 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483529 © 2024 Morgan et al. Published online: 18 Dec 2024. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 77 View related articles View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=didr20 https://www.tandfonline.com/journals/didr20?src=pdf https://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.2147/IDR.S483529 https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483529 https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=didr20&show=instructions&src=pdf https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=didr20&show=instructions&src=pdf https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.2147/IDR.S483529?src=pdf https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/mlt/10.2147/IDR.S483529?src=pdf http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.2147/IDR.S483529&domain=pdf&date_stamp=18%20Dec%202024 http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.2147/IDR.S483529&domain=pdf&date_stamp=18%20Dec%202024 https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=didr20 O R I G I N A L R E S E A R C H Antimicrobial Resistance Levels of Non-Tuberculous Bacteria Isolates from Sputum of TB Patients in Ghana Portia Abena Morgan, Desmond Opoku Ntiamoah, Prince Asare , Ishaque Siam Mintah, Stephen Osei-Wusu , Augustine Asare Boadu, Emelia Konadu Danso, Ivy Naa Koshie Lamptey, Emmanuel Afreh, Amanda Tetteh, Adwoa Asante-Poku, Isaac Darko Otchere , Dorothy Yeboah-Manu Department of Bacteriology, Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana Correspondence: Isaac Darko Otchere, Email idotchere@noguchi.ug.edu.gh Background: Patients with tuberculosis (TB) often harbor diverse bacteria in their sputum, including both commensal and opportunistic pathogens. This study aimed to characterize the sputum microbiota of TB patients before and after the intensive phase of anti-TB treatment and assess changes in bacterial diversity and antibiotic resistance profiles. Methods: A total of 162 patients with TB (128 males, 34 females; age range 18–82 years) provided sputum samples at baseline, of which 72 provided follow-up sputum after two months of intensive phase treatment. Sputum samples were cultured on standard agar plates, and distinct colonies were identified by Gram staining and bio-typing using MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry. Antibiotic susceptibility testing of the identified Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria was performed using the Kirby–Bauer method according to the CLSI guidelines. Results: At baseline, 209 bacterial isolates were recovered, dominated by Gram-positive bacteria (GPB), particularly Streptococcus oralis (19.6%) and Staphylococcus aureus (13.9%). After treatment, the isolation rate significantly decreased (from 129% to 95.8%; p = 0.000002), with a shift towards Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) dominated by E. coli. High rates of antibiotic resistance were observed for both the GNB and GPB, notably to ampicillin (86.7%), tetracycline (74%), amoxicillin (70.3%), and sulfamethoxazole (63%) for GNP, and PEN (76.9%) for the GPB. 53% of S. aureus isolates were phenotypic Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and 57.7% of suspected extended-spectrum Beta-lactamase (ESBL) producers were confirmed positive, predominantly carrying the blaCTX-M-1 gene. Conclusion: The observed antibiotic resistance among the identified isolates, including MRSA and ESBL, underscores the need for routine antibiotic susceptibility testing and judicious antibiotic use in Ghana. Further research is needed to explore the long-term consequences of these microbiome shifts on TB treatment outcomes and risk of secondary infections. Plain Language Summary: Tuberculosis (TB) continues to be the leading cause of adult mortality owing to a single infectious disease. The interplay between TB, diabetes, and HIV has become prominent in current TB research. However, the influence of these interactions on lung microflora, other than TB bacilli, has not been extensively explored. Notwithstanding, there is a potential interaction between these non-tuberculous bacteria and TB bacilli, which may impact disease progression and treatment outcomes of TB disease, irrespective of co-infection with HIV or comorbid diabetes. We observed antibiotic resistance among identified non- tuberculous bacteria isolated from the lungs of TB patients in Ghana, irrespective of co-infection with HIV or comorbidity with diabetes, including resistance to the commonly used drugs for treating bacterial diseases. This underscores the need for routine antibiotic susceptibility testing and judicious antibiotic use in Ghana. Keywords: tuberculosis, sputum microbiota, antibiotic resistance, microbiome, ESBL, MRSA Infection and Drug Resistance 2024:17 5663–5673 5663 © 2024 Morgan et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms. php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php). Infection and Drug Resistance Dovepress Open Access Full Text Article Received: 19 August 2024 Accepted: 25 October 2024 Published: 18 December 2024 http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0673-5967 http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2840-3568 http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8982-9488 http://www.dovepress.com/permissions.php https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php https://www.dovepress.com Background Tuberculosis (TB), caused by the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC), remains a global health problem with approximately 10 million infections in 2022. 1 In Ghana, TB is the fourth leading cause of death among other communicable and non-communicable diseases 2 Infection usually results in complex immune interactions aimed at clearing the bacteria3 however, the chemical signals produced can weaken the host humoral and cellular immunity, making the individual prone to other infections and diseases.4 For example, there is evidence of reduced bactericidal activity of the alveolar surface against other bacteria during active TB.5 In cases of comorbidities with other immune- disrupting conditions such as diabetes or HIV infection, there is an increased alteration in commensal organisms in the lungs. This allows over-proliferation of bacteria, including pathogenic ones, which can cause complications and/or coinfections in TB patients, especially in regions with a high TB burden.6–8 Furthermore, some co-infected bacteria may be resistant to antimicrobials, including regular TB drugs, which can lead to unforeseen complications. Non-mycobacterial colonization of the lungs and gut usually includes both Gram-positive (GPB) and Gram- negative (GNB) bacteria.9,10 Over time, some of these bacteria can become drug-resistant due to untargeted antibiotic exposure and/or misuse.11 Also, during anti-TB therapy, antibiotics can further destabilize the host microbiome, resulting in the accumulation of resistance,12 as well as killing susceptible bacteria, including those that are beneficial to gut health.13 Among various bacterial families, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) genes are acquired either by mutation or horizontal gene transfer of plasmids, leading to resistance to β-lactam antibiotics. blaTEM, blaSHV, blaOXA-48, blaCTX-M-1, blaCTX-M-2, and blaCTX-M-9 are common ESBL genes with increased specificity against ceftazidime, cefotax ime, and ceftriaxone substrates.14,15 This study aimed to determine the drug resistance pattern of indicator bacteria isolated from the sputum and stool of TB patients16 as well as identify potential drug resistance-conferring genes. These indicator bacteria included GN Enterobacteriaceae, Klebsiella sp., E. coli and Enterobacter sp., as well as GP Staphylococcus and Streptococcus species. Materials and Methods Ethical Approval Ethical approval for the study and its protocols after scientific and technical review was obtained from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research (NMIMR), University of Ghana (Federal wide assurance number: FWA00001824) and the Ethics Review Committee of the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital. All study procedures were performed according to approved protocols in compliance with the declaration of Helsinki. Study Area and Recruitment of Study Participants The targets for this cross-sectional study were microbiologically confirmed TB cases who were 18 years old and above who were not on any immunosuppressive treatment. The purpose of the study was explained to the target population in a language understood by them after which consent was sought before recruitment. We excluded patients younger than 18 years of age and pregnant women. The diagnosis of pulmonary TB was based on the positive Gene Xpert MTB-RIF (Cepheid, USA) and chest radiography. A structured questionnaire was used to record demographic and clinical data including age, sex, history of TB, TB bacterial load, alcohol and cigarette use, previous medications, and other underlying conditions confirmed TB participants were screened at baseline for diabetes (fasting blood sugar above 7 mmol/L and HbA1c confirmatory test above 6.4%), HIV (positive rapid First Response HIV1-2.0 card test, Premier Medical Corporation Limited, India), and positive confirmatory OraQuick rapid test (OraSure Technologies, USA)). Sputum samples were collected following standard procedures at baseline (before starting anti-TB therapy) and at 2 months follow-up (after the intensive phase of anti-TB therapy) using clean sterile plastic containers. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483529 DovePress Infection and Drug Resistance 2024:17 5664 Morgan et al Dovepress Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) https://www.dovepress.com https://www.dovepress.com Isolation and Identification of Non-Mycobacteria from Sputum Samples Sputum samples from recruited individuals were aseptically inoculated immediately in the field within 5–10 mins after sample collection on chocolate agar (CA), mannitol salt agar (MSA), gentamicin blood agar (GBA), and Potato Dextrose agar (PDA) to isolate fastidious organisms. Colonies distinct from all primary plates were purified, characterized, and identified by Gram staining and MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry (Bruker Daltonics, Germany). Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using the Kirby-Bauer disc diffusion method17 (Figure S1) following the CLSI guidelines.18 Quality control for antibiotics and other reagents was performed using the reference standard strains of Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 3556 and Escherichia coli ATCC 25922. For GNB, 30 µg of Meropenem (MEM), 30 µg of cefotaxime (CRX), 30 µg of cefuroxime, 30 µg of amikacin (AMK), 10 µg of gentamicin (GEN), 1.25/ 23.75 µg of trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (SXT), 10 µg of ampicillin (AMP), 30 µg of tetracycline (TET), 30 µg of chloramphenicol (CHL), 5 µg of ciprofloxacin (CIP), 30 µg of ceftazidime (CAZ), and 30 µg pf amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (AMC) all from Oxoid (Oxoid, USA) were used. Similarly, GPB were tested against 10 µg of GEN, 10 µg of TET, 30 µg of CHL, 1.25/23.75 µg of SXT, 5 µg of CIP, 30 µg of cefoxitin (FOX), 10 units of penicillin (PEN), 1 µg of oxacillin (OX), 15 µg of erythromycin (ERY), 30 µg of vancomycin (VA), 30 µg of azithromycin (AZM), 30 µg of chloramphenicol (CHL), 30 µg of linezolid (LZD), and 2 µg of clindamycin (DA) from Oxoid (Oxoid, USA). Staphylococcus aureus isolates with FOX zone sizes ≤21 mm (at 33–35 ◦C ambient air incubation for 16–18 h) were considered presumptive methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)19 and were phenotypically confirmed by Microscan MIC detection (Pos Breakpoint Combo Panel 28) (Beckman Coulter, USA). Multidrug resistance (MDR) was defined as the resistance to at least three groups of antibiotics: ESBL and MRSA.20 Phenotypic ESBL Detection and Molecular Confirmation The simultaneous phenotypic resistance of GNB Enterobacteriaceae to β-lactam antibiotics, cefotaxime, and ceftazidime (Figure S1) was confirmed as ESBLs using PCR to detect the presence of six different ESBL-conferring genes in Enterobacterales: blaTEM, blaSHV, blaOXA-48, blaCTX-M-1, blaCTX-M-2, and blaCTX-M-9. A simple DNA extraction protocol as previously described21 was used for crude DNA extraction from the presumptive isolates, followed by multiplex PCR for the six different ESBL genes.22 Amplicons were visualized after resolution on 2% agarose gel. The expected band sizes for the various genes were blaTEM (800 bp), blaSHV (718 bp), blaOXA-48 (564 bp), blaCTX-M-1 (688 bp), blaCTX-M-2 (404 bp), blaCTX-M-9 (561 bp). For quality control, each batch of the medium and reagent was subjected to sterility and performance testing. During the antibiotic susceptibility test, quality control was done using the control strains of E. coli ATCC 25922 and S. aureus 3556. Data Analysis Categorical data are presented as numbers and proportions and were compared using the chi-square (χ2) test, Fisher’s exact test, and two-sample proportion tests when applicable. The antibiogram of each isolate was interpreted according to CLSI guidelines and specifications as resistant, intermediate, or susceptible. The percentages of cases in each category were then computed and compared using graph pad Prism and R. Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted, and associations were determined at 95% confidence level. Results The study involved a total of 162 TB cases, comprising 128 (79.0%) males and 34 (21%) females. Sputum samples were obtained from all participants whose ages ranged–18–82 years (mean, 42 years; median, 44 years) (Table 1). Results from Gene Xpert-MTB showed 85 (52.1%) of the participants had high TB bacterial loads, whereas 30 (18.4%) and 38 (23.3%) had medium and low bacterial loads, respectively. Resistance to rifampicin was observed in two patients with low MTB and one with high MTB load. Infection and Drug Resistance 2024:17 https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483529 DovePress 5665 Dovepress Morgan et al Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) https://www.dovepress.com/get_supplementary_file.php?f=483529.pdf https://www.dovepress.com/get_supplementary_file.php?f=483529.pdf https://www.dovepress.com https://www.dovepress.com The study participants comprised 123 (75.4%) TB-only, 23 (14.1%) TB–diabetes, and 16 (9.8%) TB–HIV cohorts. At follow-up, 73 (44.8%) of the primary cases were re-recruited: 52 (80%) TB-Only, 8 (12%) TB-DM, and 5 (8%) TB-HIV. Eighty-two of the primary cases were lost to follow-up, whereas the deceased patients included 4 males and 3 females (Table 1). We found 81% of participants had low BMI, 66.7% had chest pain, 65.4% had extreme cough, and 64.2% had night sweats during recruitment. Symptoms at follow-up were, however, reduced such as chest pain (25%), persistent extreme cough (6.9%) and night sweats (16.7%) (Table S1). Identified Bacterial Species from Sputum Samples At baseline, a total of 162 sputum samples were cultured for isolation of bacteria, with an average isolation frequency of 1.3 organisms per sample resulting in 209 organisms from sputum samples. The isolated bacteria were mostly GPB (137; 65.6%), with relatively high abundance of Streptococcus oralis (19.6%), Staphylococcus aureus (13.9%), Staphylococcus epidermidis (12%), and Streptococcus mitis (6.2%). After the 2 follow-up, 69 isolates were recovered from the 72 sputum samples collected from the study participants, dominated by 71.1% GNB (49/69), which were mostly E. coli (36; 53%). We observed from the pairwise comparison of sputum from the three TB cohorts before and after intensive phase anti-TB therapy that most of the organisms isolated from sputum samples 55.7% (54/97), irrespective of the TB-cohort, were not isolated after the intensive phase of treatment (Figure 1), and that there was a significant difference in isolation rate (p = 0.000002) between baseline (209/162) and follow-up samples (69/72) using two-sample proportion test as described.23,24 Antibiotic Susceptibility Profile of Indicator Organisms A total of 279 bacterial isolates from both baseline and follow-up samples, comprising 157 GPB (137 baseline and 20 follow-up isolates) and 122 GNP (72 baseline and 49 follow-up isolates), were screened for antimicrobial susceptibility based on the Gram staining results (Figure 2). Among the GNB, the species with the highest resistance was E. coli irrespective of whether they were isolated from baseline or follow-up samples, with TET, AMP, SXT, and AMC being the most affected drugs. E. coli, Enterobacter and Citrobacter species were highly resistant to all four drugs. The K. pneumoniae isolates were highly resistant to AMP, Table 1 Biographical and Clinical Data of Participants Parameter Number of Patients Male Female Mean Age 42.4 38.8 Diabetics 23 17 (74%) 6 (26%) HIV positive 16 11 (68.7) 5 (31.3%) Total Primary cases 162 128 (79%) 34 (21%) TB-Only 123 101 (82%) 22 (18%) TB-Diabetes 23 16 (70%) 7 (30%) TB-HIV 16 11 (69%) 5 (31%) Follow-up 72 56 (77.8%) 17 (22.2%) TB-Only 57 45 (79%) 12 (21%) TB-Diabetes 10 7 (70%) 3 (30%) TB-HIV 5 3 (60%) 2 (40%) Deceased 7 4 (57%) 3 (43%) Bacterial load (GeneXpert) High 85 66 (77.6%) 19 (22.4%) Medium 30 24 (80%) 6 (20%) Low 38 31 (82%) 7 (18%) Healthy controls 15 5 (33.3%) 10 (66.7%) https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483529 DovePress Infection and Drug Resistance 2024:17 5666 Morgan et al Dovepress Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) https://www.dovepress.com/get_supplementary_file.php?f=483529.pdf https://www.dovepress.com https://www.dovepress.com Figure 1 Abundance of microorganisms isolated from sputum samples at baseline and 2- months follow-up among the three TB cohorts (TB-only, TB-DM, TB-HIV) and healthy controls. Infection and Drug Resistance 2024:17 https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483529 DovePress 5667 Dovepress Morgan et al Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) https://www.dovepress.com https://www.dovepress.com irrespective of the cohort. MEM followed by AMK, GEN and cefepime (bacterial). On the other hand, we observed on average the highest resistance against by GNB to AMP (86.7%), followed by TET (74%), AMC (70.3%), and SXT (63%) cohorts (Figure 2). In the case of the two GPB species, Staphylococcus sp and Streptococcus sp (Figure 3), penicillin was the drug with least potency irrespective of the species and/or cohort, with at least 63% up to 89% (76.9% on average) resistance. Although all Streptococcus sp isolates were sensitive to CIP, AZM, GEN, OX, and FOX, irrespective of the sampling period, Staphylococcus isolates were mostly resistant to these drugs, with every follow-up isolate being resistant to CIP, AZM, GEN, and OX, and only FOX showed little activity against them (Figure 3). The most potent drug against GPB was chloramphenicol, followed by ceftriaxone (Figure 3). Out of the total S. aureus isolates at both baseline and follow-up, 53% were phenotypic MRSA, using cefoxitin screening as a substitute marker for detection of MRSA when genotypic detection of mecA gene was not possible.25 A total of 104 suspected ESBLs among the isolates (from cefoxitin screening) were tested for PCR detection of the common ESBL genes: blaTEM, blaSHV, blaOXA-48, blaCTX-M-1, blaCTX-M-2, and blaCTX-M-9. Of these, 60 (57.7%) were confirmed as ESBL-positive, including 45 baseline isolates and 15 follow-up isolates. The confirmed ESBLs included E. coli, K. pneumoniae, E. cloacae, and C. freundii. As shown below (Figure 4), the 45 confirmed ESBLs at baseline Figure 2 Antibiotic sensitivity of different gram-negative organisms at baseline and follow-up to selected antibiotics. Abbreviations: MEM, Meropenem; CTX, Cefotaxime; AMK, Amikacin; CRX, Cefuroxime; GEN, Gentamicin; TET, Tetracycline; AMP, Ampicillin; SXT, Sulfamethoxazole- trimethoprim; CHL, Chloramphenicol; FEP, Cefepime; CIP, Ciprofloxacin; CAZ, Ceftazidime; AMC, Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483529 DovePress Infection and Drug Resistance 2024:17 5668 Morgan et al Dovepress Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) https://www.dovepress.com https://www.dovepress.com were mostly E. coli (28; 62.2%), K. pneumoniae were (8; 17.8%), E. cloacae (8; 17.8%), and C. freundii (1; 2.2%). However, the follow-up isolates were mainly E. coli ESBLs making up 93.3% of the 15 ESBLs isolated. The blaCTX-M-1 was the most detected β-lactamase gene among 20 (28.75%) isolates followed by blaOXA-48 (17.5%), blaCTX-M-9 (16.25%), blaTEM (15%) blaCTX-M-2 (13.75%), and blaSHV (8.75) (Figure 5). Discussion The presence of other bacterial infections in the lungs of pulmonary tuberculosis patients (PTB) is one of the most common complications of PTB.26 This study examined the bacteriological aspects of sputum samples from TB patients with or without comorbidities of either diabetes or HIV before TB treatment (baseline) and after the intensive phase of TB treatment (follow-up). This included the isolation rates of bacteria other than members of the Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex, the composition and abundance of the isolated bacteria, and the antibiotic susceptibility profiles of the isolated bacteria. Bacterial Identification and Isolation Rates The predominance of Streptococcus and Staphylococcus species in the lungs of TB patients aligns with the common microbiota of the upper respiratory tract.27 However, the significant reduction in isolation rates after the intensive phase of TB therapy could be due to the effect of the administered TB drugs (isoniazid, rifampicin, ethambutol, and Figure 3 Antibiotic sensitivity of different gram-positive organisms at baseline and follow-up to selected antibiotics. Abbreviations: PEN, Penicillin; DA, Clindamycin; CRO, Ceftriaxone; LZD, Linezolid; TE, Tetracycline; VA, Vancomycin; C, Chloramphenicol; ERY, Erythromycin; SXT, Sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim; CIP, Ciprofloxacin; AZM, Azithromycin; GEN, Gentamicin; OX, Oxacillin; FOX, Cefoxitin. Infection and Drug Resistance 2024:17 https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483529 DovePress 5669 Dovepress Morgan et al Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) https://www.dovepress.com https://www.dovepress.com pyrazinamide), which may have broad-spectrum collateral activity against non-tuberculous bacteria in the respiratory tract.28 It also suggests that these bacteria are potential colonizers rather than playing a direct role in TB pathogenesis. Additionally, the improvement in immunity accompanying the clearance of TB bacteria after the intensive phase of treatment can also contribute to a reduction in the overall bacterial load and diversity of the non-tuberculous bacterial population.29 Nevertheless, the increase in the proportion of GNB, predominantly E. coli, post-treatment is alarming.30 This could be due to antibiotic-induced dysbiosis of the respiratory microbiome or development of secondary bacterial infections. However, further investigation is required to determine the clinical significance of this potential dysbiosis. Antibiotic Susceptibility Trends The widespread resistance of GNB and GPB to ampicillin, tetracycline, and sulfamethoxazole is alarming, highlighting a crucial public health concern.31,32 This emphasizes the need for routine antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) for bacteria-associated infections to guide treatment choices for better outcomes. Meropenem, amikacin, gentamicin, and cefepime were the most effective, especially against the isolated GNB. These might be considered as alternatives for Figure 5 Distribution of ESBL genes detected from the total confirmed positive ESBLs. Figure 4 Percentage of ESBLs distribution amongst the different organisms. (A) Baseline; (B) Follow-up). https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483529 DovePress Infection and Drug Resistance 2024:17 5670 Morgan et al Dovepress Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) https://www.dovepress.com https://www.dovepress.com empirical therapy in settings with high resistance rates while awaiting AST results that may take between a couple of days to weeks, depending on the settings.33,34 The observed resistance patterns for commonly used antibiotics in this study generally mirror the trends observed globally, especially in areas with high antibiotic use and potentially less regulated prescribing practices.32,35 The research sheds valuable light on changes in the sputum microbiome after anti-TB treatment. While GNB dominance after tuberculosis treatment has been mentioned in some studies,30 a more in-depth analysis of these shifts is needed, especially considering their potential impact on treatment response, TB recurrence, or development of non-tuberculous lung pathologies. The observed ESBL rate (57.7%) is comparable to the rates (41.5% to 57.8%) reported by earlier studies from different parts of Ghana36–38 and remains higher than 36.1% in South Africa39 and 38.5% Tunisia40 while being lower than the 89% reported in Uganda.41 The dominance of the blaCTX-M-1 gene (28.78%), followed by blaOXA-48 (17.5%), and blaCTX-M-9 (16.25%) among the identified ESBLs agrees with earlier reports from other parts of Africa and Asia.42,43 This finding is alarming because the blaCTX-M product can hydrolyze both third- and fourth-generation cephalosporins and is implicated in cefotaxime resistance.44 The notable prevalence of MRSA and ESBL producers highlights the additional challenge of multidrug-resistant (MDR) organisms complicating TB management45 which may require alternative antibiotics, such as vancomycin.46 Aggressive infection control measures and tailored antibiotic regimens based on AST, including DNA-based diagnostics targeting specific AMR genes and novel rapid phenotypic assays, such as bioluminescence-based AST that can be performed in a matter of hours,47,48 are crucial. Limitations Our findings may be limited by the sample size, which may limit their generalizability. Additionally, the absence of a healthy control group makes it difficult to definitively distinguish between normal flora and potential secondary pathogens in post-treatment stages. Conclusion This study underscores the value of antibiotic susceptibility testing throughout TB treatment, for both initial antibiotic selection and ongoing therapeutic decision-making. We tested a substantial panel of antibiotics to provide a broad overview of bacterial resistance patterns, which is valuable in determining treatment options. We highlight drugs with the highest and lowest potential for the treatment of upper respiratory bacterial colonization and/or infections in Ghana. The observed ESBL rate (57.7%) is alarming, as ESBL bacteria can be resistant to multiple classes of antibiotics. Further studies are warranted to elucidate the long-term consequences of anti-TB treatment on the respiratory microbiome and its association with clinical outcomes. This could potentially inform strategies to mitigate dysbiosis-related complications. The high proportion of MDR non-tuberculous bacteria underscores the need for improved detection and surveillance as well as antibiotic stewardship in Ghana. Acknowledgments We would like to acknowledge the staff of the Department of Chest Diseases, Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital, especially Dr. Yayra Klinogo, Nelly Arthur, Godfrey Adams, Emmanuel Tetteh, Margaret Gakpo, Winnifred Amoako-Essien, and Abigail Osei Fordjour for their support in this study. Ms. Susan Darkwahene-Boateng and Ms. Afua Nyarkoa Yeboah from the Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research assisted with sample transportation. Author Contributions All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Infection and Drug Resistance 2024:17 https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483529 DovePress 5671 Dovepress Morgan et al Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) https://www.dovepress.com https://www.dovepress.com Funding This work was funded by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP) Senior Fellowship to DY-M (TMA.2017.GSF.1942-TB-DM). Dorothy Yeboah-Manu is a senior fellow of the GSK-EDCTP. Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work. References 1. WHO. New treatment for TB. Global Tuberculosis Report. 2024. Available from: https://www.who.int/teams/global-tuberculosis-programme/tb- reports/global-tuberculosis-report-2023/featured-topics/new-treatment-tb. Accessed February 26, 2024. 2. G NTP. Ghana TB Dashboard. Published 2024. Available from: https://www.stoptb.org/static_pages/GHA_Dashboard.html. Accessed May 15, 2024. 3. Segovia-Juarez JL, Ganguli S, Kirschner D. Identifying control mechanisms of granuloma formation during M. tuberculosis infection using an agent-based model. J Theor Biol. 2004;231(3):357–376. doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2004.06.031 4. Wassermann R, Gulen MF, Sala C, et al. Mycobacterium tuberculosis differentially activates cGAS- and inflammasome-dependent intracellular immune responses through ESX-1. Cell Host Microbe. 2015;17(6):799–810. doi:10.1016/j.chom.2015.05.003 5. Selvaraj P, Venkataprasad N, Vijayan VK, Narayanan PR. Altered bactericidal activity against Staphylococcus aureus in tuberculous bronchoal veolar lavage fluids. Eur Respir J. 1994;7:121–126. 6. Iliyasu G, Mohammad AB, Yakasai AM, Dayyab FM, Oduh J, Habib AG. Gram-negative bacilli are a major cause of secondary pneumonia in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis: evidence from a cross-sectional study in a tertiary hospital in Nigeria. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2018;112 (5):252–254. doi:10.1093/TRSTMH/TRY044 7. Moore DP, Klugman KP, Madhi SA. Role of streptococcus pneumoniae in hospitalization for acute community-acquired pneumonia associated with culture-confirmed mycobacterium tuberculosis in children: a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine probe study. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2010;29 (12):1099–1104. doi:10.1097/INF.0B013E3181EAEFFF 8. Schleicher GK, Feldman C. Dual infection with Streptococcus pneumoniae and Mycobacterium tuberculosis in HIV-seropositive patients with community acquired pneumonia. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2003;7(12):1207–1208. 9. Agard MJ, Ozer EA, Morris AR, Piseaux R, Hauser AR. A genomic approach to identify Klebsiella pneumoniae and Acinetobacter baumannii strains with enhanced competitive fitness in the lungs during multistrain pneumonia. Infect Immun. 2019;87(6). doi:10.1128/IAI.00871-18 10. Siegel SJ, Weiser JN. Mechanisms of bacterial colonization of the respiratory tract. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2015;69(5):425–444. doi:10.1146/ annurev-micro-091014-104209.Mechanisms 11. Meyer E, Gastmeier P, Deja M, Schwab F. Antibiotic consumption and resistance: data from Europe and Germany. Int J Med Microbiol. 2013;303 (6–7):388–395. doi:10.1016/j.ijmm.2013.04.004 12. Donskey CJ, Chowdhry TK, Hecker MT, et al. Effect of antibiotic therapy on the density of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in the stool of colonized patients. N Engl J Med. 2000;343(26):1925–1932. doi:10.1056/nejm200012283432604 13. Sorbara MT, Pamer EG. Correction: interbacterial mechanisms of colonization resistance and the strategies pathogens use to overcome them. Mucosal Immunol. 2019;12(3):840. doi:10.1038/s41385-019-0151-7 14. Abrar S, Ain NU, Liaqat H, Hussain S, Rasheed F, Riaz S. Distribution of bla CTX-M, bla TEM, bla SHV and bla OXA genes in extended- spectrum-β-lactamase-producing clinical isolates: a three-year multi-center study from Lahore, Pakistan. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2019;8 (1):1–10. doi:10.1186/s13756-019-0536-0 15. Pfeifer Y, Cullik A, Witte W. Resistance to cephalosporins and carbapenems in Gram-negative bacterial pathogens. Int J Med Microbiol. 2010;300 (6):371–379. doi:10.1016/J.IJMM.2010.04.005 16. Okeke IN, Peeling RW, Goossens H, et al. Diagnostics as essential tools for containing antibacterial resistance. Drug Resist Updat. 2011;14 (2):95–106. doi:10.1016/J.DRUP.2011.02.002 17. Hudzicki J. Kirby-Bauer Disk diffusion susceptibility test protocol author information. Am Soc Microbiol. 2012;1–13. 18. CLSI. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. 31st Edition, CLSI supplement M100. 2021;41:1–2. 19. Skov R, Smyth R, Larsen AR, et al. Phenotypic detection of methicillin resistance in staphylococcus aureus by disk diffusion testing and Etest on Mueller-Hinton Agar. J Clin Microbiol. 2006;44(12):4395. doi:10.1128/JCM.01411-06 20. Magiorakos AP, Srinivasan A, Carey RB, et al. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: an international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012;18(3):268–281. doi:10.1111/j.1469- 0691.2011.03570.x 21. Fazhan H, Waiho K, Shahreza MS. A simple and efficient total genomic DNA extraction method for individual zooplankton. Springerplus. 2016;5 (1). doi:10.1186/s40064-016-3724-x 22. Dallenne C, da Costa A, Decré D, Favier C, Arlet G. Development of a set of multiplex PCR assays for the detection of genes encoding important β-lactamases in Enterobacteriaceae. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65(3):490–495. doi:10.1093/JAC/DKP498 23. Webb LR Mostly Harmless Statistics. LibreTexts. Available from: https://stats.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_Statistics/Mostly_Harmless_ Statistics_(Webb). Accessed December 14, 2024. 24. Fleiss JL, Levin B, Cho Paik M. Shweart WA, Wilks SS. Stat Methods Rates Proportions. Third Ed. Shweart WA, Wilks SS, editors. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2004. doi:10.1002/0471445428 25. Fernandes CJ, Fernandes LA, Collignon P, et al. Cefoxitin resistance as a surrogate marker for the detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005;55(4):506–510. doi:10.1093/jac/dki052 26. Lyon SM, Rossman MD. Pulmonary tuberculosis. Microbiol Spectr. 2017;5(1). doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.tnmi7-0032-2016 https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483529 DovePress Infection and Drug Resistance 2024:17 5672 Morgan et al Dovepress Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) https://www.who.int/teams/global-tuberculosis-programme/tb-reports/global-tuberculosis-report-2023/featured-topics/new-treatment-tb https://www.who.int/teams/global-tuberculosis-programme/tb-reports/global-tuberculosis-report-2023/featured-topics/new-treatment-tb https://www.stoptb.org/static_pages/GHA_Dashboard.html https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2004.06.031 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chom.2015.05.003 https://doi.org/10.1093/TRSTMH/TRY044 https://doi.org/10.1097/INF.0B013E3181EAEFFF https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.00871-18 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-micro-091014-104209.Mechanisms https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-micro-091014-104209.Mechanisms https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmm.2013.04.004 https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm200012283432604 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41385-019-0151-7 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-019-0536-0 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJMM.2010.04.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.DRUP.2011.02.002 https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01411-06 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03570.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-0691.2011.03570.x https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-3724-x https://doi.org/10.1093/JAC/DKP498 https://stats.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_Statistics/Mostly_Harmless_Statistics_(Webb https://stats.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_Statistics/Mostly_Harmless_Statistics_(Webb https://doi.org/10.1002/0471445428 https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dki052 https://doi.org/10.1128/microbiolspec.tnmi7-0032-2016 https://www.dovepress.com https://www.dovepress.com 27. Man WH, De Steenhuijsen Piters WAA, Bogaert D. The microbiota of the respiratory tract: gatekeeper to respiratory health. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2017;15(5):259–270. doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2017.14 28. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO Consolidated Guidelines on Tuberculosis. Module 3: Diagnosis - Rapid Diagnostics for Tuberculosis Detection; 2021. 29. Luo X, Wu F, Ma J, Xiao H, Cui H. Immunological recovery in patients with pulmonary tuberculosis after intensive phase treatment. J Int Med Res. 2018;46(9):3539–3551. doi:10.1177/0300060518773258/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/10.1177_0300060518773258-FIG6.JPEG 30. Garcia-vidal C, Sanjuan G, Moreno-garcía E, et al. Incidence of co-infections and superinfections in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021;27(2021):83–88. doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2020.07.041 31. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO Consolidated Guidelines on Tuberculosis, Module 3: Diagnosis - Rapid Diagnostics for Tuberculosis Detection; 2024. 32. Ahmed S, Ahmed MZ, Rafique S, et al. Recent approaches for downplaying antibiotic resistance: molecular mechanisms. Biomed Res Int. 2023;2023. doi:10.1155/2023/5250040 33. Stephanie F, Saragih M, Tambunan USF. Recent progress and challenges for drug-resistant tuberculosis treatment. Pharmaceutics. 2021;13(5):592. doi:10.3390/pharmaceutics13050592 34. Tiberi S, Utjesanovic N, Galvin J, et al. Drug resistant TB – latest developments in epidemiology, diagnostics and management. Int J Infect Dis. 2022:124:S20–S25. doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2022.03.026. 35. Behera B, Sahu K, Bhoi P, Mohanty J. Prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of bacteria in ICU patients with lower respiratory tract infection: a cross-sectional study. J Acute Dis. 2020;9(4):157. doi:10.4103/2221-6189.288593 36. Hackman H, Osei-Adjei G, Gordon A. Phenotypic Characterization of AmpC beta-lactamase among Cefoxitin resistant Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae Isolates in Accra, Ghana. J Biol. 2013;3(16):102–107. 37. Feglo PK, Adu-Sarkodie Y. Antimicrobial resistance patterns of extended spectrum Β-lactamase producing Klebsiella and E. coli isolates from a tertiary hospital in Ghana. Eur Sci J. 2016;12(30):174. doi:10.19044/esj.2016.v12n30p174 38. Deku JG, Duedu KO, Ativi E, Kpene GE, Feglo PK. Occurrence and distribution of extended-spectrum β-lactamase in clinical Escherichia coli isolates at Ho teaching hospital in Ghana. Ghana Med J. 2021;55(4):298–307. doi:10.4314/gmj.v55i4.11 39. Tau NP, Smith AM, Sooka A, Keddy KH. Molecular characterization of extended-spectrum β-lactamase producing Shigella isolates from humans in South Africa, 2003-2009. J Med Microbiol. 2012;61(1):162–164. doi:10.1099/jmm.0.033142-0 40. Ben-hamouda T, Foulon T, Ben-mahrez K, Klebsiella E. Involvement of SHV-12 and SHV-2a encoding plasmids in outbreaks of extended- spectrum ?-Lactamase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae in a Tunisian Neonatal ward. Microb Drug Resist. 2004;10(2):132–139. doi:10.1089/ 1076629041310118 41. Andrew B, Kagirita A, Bazira J. Prevalence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases-producing microorganisms in patients admitted at KRRH, Southwestern Uganda. Int J Microbiol. 2017;2017:1–5. doi:10.1155/2017/3183076 42. Saleem AF, Allana A, Hale L, et al. The gut of healthy infants in the community as a reservoir of esbl and carbapenemase- producing bacteria. Antibiotics. 2020;9(6):1–11. doi:10.3390/antibiotics9060286 43. Moirongo RM, Lorenz E, Ntinginya NE, et al. Regional variation of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacterales, Fluoroquinolone-Resistant Salmonella enterica and Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus among Febrile patients in Sub-Saharan Africa. Front Microbiol. 2020;11:1–10. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2020.567235 44. Gazouli M, Tzelepi E, Markogiannakis A, Legakis NJ, Tzouvelekis LS. Two novel plasmid-mediated cefotaxime-hydrolyzing β-lactamases (CTX- M-5 and CTX-M-6) from Salmonella typhimurium. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 1998;165(2):289–293. doi:10.1016/S0378-1097(98)00290-0 45. Falzon D, Schünemann HJ, Harausz E, et al. World Health Organization treatment guidelines for drug-resistant tuberculosis, 2016 update. Eur Respir J. 2017;49(3):1602308. doi:10.1183/13993003.02308-2016 46. Brown NM, Goodman AL, Horner C, Jenkins A, Brown EM. Treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): updated guidelines from the UK. JAC-Antimicrobial Resist. 2021;3(1). doi:10.1093/jacamr/dlaa114 47. Sever EA, Aybakan E, Beşli Y, Karatuna O, Kocagoz T. A novel rapid bioluminescence-based antimicrobial susceptibility testing method based on adenosine triphosphate consumption. Front Microbiol. 2024;15. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2024.1357680. 48. Smith KP, Kirby JE. Rapid susceptibility testing methods. Clin Lab Med. 2019;39(3):333. doi:10.1016/J.CLL.2019.04.001 Infection and Drug Resistance Dovepress Publish your work in this journal Infection and Drug Resistance is an international, peer-reviewed open-access journal that focuses on the optimal treatment of infection (bacterial, fungal and viral) and the development and institution of preventive strategies to minimize the development and spread of resistance. The journal is specifically concerned with the epidemiology of antibiotic resistance and the mechanisms of resistance development and diffusion in both hospitals and the community. The manuscript management system is completely online and includes a very quick and fair peer-review system, which is all easy to use. Visit http://www.dovepress.com/testimonials.php to read real quotes from published authors. Submit your manuscript here: https://www.dovepress.com/infection-and-drug-resistance-journal Infection and Drug Resistance 2024:17 DovePress 5673 Dovepress Morgan et al Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2017.14 https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060518773258/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/10.1177_0300060518773258-FIG6.JPEG https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.07.041 https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/5250040 https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13050592 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2022.03.026 https://doi.org/10.4103/2221-6189.288593 https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n30p174 https://doi.org/10.4314/gmj.v55i4.11 https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.033142-0 https://doi.org/10.1089/1076629041310118 https://doi.org/10.1089/1076629041310118 https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3183076 https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9060286 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.567235 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1097(98)00290-0 https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.02308-2016 https://doi.org/10.1093/jacamr/dlaa114 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1357680 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CLL.2019.04.001 https://www.dovepress.com http://www.dovepress.com/testimonials.php https://www.facebook.com/DoveMedicalPress/ https://twitter.com/dovepress https://www.linkedin.com/company/dove-medical-press https://www.youtube.com/user/dovepress https://www.dovepress.com https://www.dovepress.com Background Materials and Methods Ethical Approval Study Area and Recruitment of Study Participants Isolation and Identification of Non-Mycobacteria from Sputum Samples Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing Phenotypic ESBL Detection and Molecular Confirmation Data Analysis Results Identified Bacterial Species from Sputum Samples Antibiotic Susceptibility Profile of Indicator Organisms Discussion Bacterial Identification and Isolation Rates Antibiotic Susceptibility Trends Limitations Conclusion Acknowledgments Author Contributions Funding Disclosure