PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 41040319

Mapping genetic and phenotypic diversity of Pseudomonas aeruginosa across clinical and environmental isolation sites.

Abstract

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a clinically significant opportunistic pathogen adept at thriving in both host-associated and environmental settings. To define the extent to which P. aeruginosa isolates specialize across niches and identify genotype-phenotype correlates, we performed whole genome sequencing and comprehensive phenotypic characterization of 125 P. aeruginosa isolates from diverse clinical and environmental sites, evaluating virulence-associated traits, including motility, cytotoxicity, biofilm formation, pyocyanin production, and antimicrobial susceptibility. We identify that genomic diversity does not correlate with isolation source or most virulence phenotypes. Instead, we find that the two major P. aeruginosa clades (Groups A and B) delineate phylogeny and cytotoxicity, with Group B strains showing significantly higher cytotoxicity than Group A. Sequence analysis revealed previously uncharacterized alleles of genes encoding type III secretion effector proteins. We observed high variability amongst strains and isolation sources in all four assayed virulence phenotypes. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is exclusively observed in clinical isolates, not environmental, reflecting antibiotic exposure-driven selection. Bacterial GWAS revealed a statistically significant association between cytotoxicity and exoU presence, and we identified a novel exoU allelic variant with decreased cytotoxicity, demonstrating that functional diversity within well-characterized virulence factors may still influence pathogenic outcomes. In summary, our analyses of 125 diverse isolates suggest that the ability of P. aeruginosa to thrive across diverse niches is driven by broadly conserved genetic repertoire rather than niche-specific accessory genes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Cristina Penaranda, Evan P Brenner, Anne E Clatworthy, Lisa A Cosimi, Janani Ravi, Deborah T Hung. 2025-09-22. Mapping genetic and phenotypic diversity of Pseudomonas aeruginosa across clinical and environmental isolation sites.. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.09.22.677895

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article