The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Original Article
Volume 328:1137-1144 April 22, 1993 Number 16
NextNext

Exogenous Reinfection with Multidrug-Resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Patients with Advanced HIV Infection
Peter M. Small, Robert W. Shafer, Philip C. Hopewell, Samir P. Singh, Mary J. Murphy, Ed Desmond, Marcelino F. Sierra, and Gary K. Schoolnik

 

This Article
-Abstract

Commentary
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background In the United States there have been recent outbreaks of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. These outbreaks have primarily involved persons infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

Methods We collected clinical information on 17 patients seen at a New York City hospital who had repeatedly positive cultures for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Analysis of restriction-fragment-length polymorphisms (RFLPs) was performed on serial isolates of M. tuberculosis obtained from these patients.

Results Six patients had isolates that remained drug-susceptible, and the RFLP patterns of these isolates did not change over time. Eleven patients had isolates that became resistant to antimicrobial agents. The RFLP patterns of the isolates from six of these patients remained essentially unchanged (two strains showed one additional band) despite the development of drug resistance. In five other patients, however, the RFLP patterns of the isolates changed dramatically at the time that drug resistance was detected. The change in the RFLP pattern of the isolate from one patient appeared to be the result of contamination during processing in the laboratory. In the remaining four patients, all of whom had advanced HIV disease, the clinical and microbiologic evidence was consistent with the presence of active tuberculosis caused by a new strain of M. tuberculosis.

Conclusions Resistance to antituberculous drugs can develop not only in the strain that caused the initial disease, but also as a result of reinfection with a new strain of M. tuberculosis that is drug-resistant. Exogenous reinfection with multidrug-resistant M. tuberculosis can occur either during therapy for the original infection or after therapy has been completed.


Until recently, it was unusual to isolate drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the United States. Tuberculosis caused by such organisms occurred sporadically, and only rarely could epidemiologic connections be demonstrated between cases1,2. During the past three years, however, there have been numerous outbreaks of tuberculosis caused by organisms resistant to multiple antituberculous drugs3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11. Most such outbreaks have primarily involved persons infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), who are thought to have been exposed to the strains in medical or correction facilities. The purpose of our study was to examine the means by which patients acquire multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, since this information is needed for rational preventive strategies12.

Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis is thought to occur either through infection by organisms that are already resistant to antimicrobial agents (primary drug resistance), or through the development of drug resistance during therapy by a strain that was originally drug-sensitive (acquired drug resistance). The latter process is believed to be due to the selection of drug-resistant mutants of the original strain as a consequence of inadequate therapy13.

Analysis of restriction-fragment-length polymorphisms (RFLPs) is a well-established method of "DNA fingerprinting" that has been used to trace the transmission of particular strains of M. tuberculosis during investigations of outbreaks5,7,8,9,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21. This report describes the use of RFLP analysis to determine how multidrug-resistant tuberculosis may have developed in a group of patients who continued to have positive cultures for M. tuberculosis after the institution of antimicrobial therapy.

Methods

Kings County Hospital is a 1200-bed municipal hospital in central Brooklyn that provides primary care to residents of the surrounding community and to New York City's correctional facility on Riker's Island. In this hospital at least 300 patients, approximately half of whom are infected with HIV,22,23 have been found to have microbiologically confirmed tuberculosis each year for the past five years.

Specimen registries of the hospital mycobacteriology laboratory were reviewed for the period from April 1987 to July 1991. During this time antimicrobial-susceptibility testing was performed routinely on all initial isolates of M. tuberculosis and was repeated every three months on all subsequent isolates from the same patient. The susceptibility of the isolates to isoniazid (0.1 or 0.2 µg per milliliter), rifampin (2.0 µg per milliliter), streptomycin (6.0 µg per milliliter), and ethambutol (7.5 µg per milliliter) was determined with a radiometric broth method (BACTEC system, Johnston Laboratories, Towson, Md.). Specimens processed after October 1990 were also tested for their susceptibility to pyrazinamide (100 µg per milliliter).

The results of all drug-susceptibility tests were reviewed to identify patients who had repeatedly positive cultures for M. tuberculosis at Kings County Hospital that either remained sensitive to all antituberculous drugs for more than one year or became resistant to isoniazid, rifampin, or both drugs.

Slant cultures of Lowenstein-Jensen medium inoculated from the primary cultures, which had been maintained at 4 °C, were subcultured. These isolates were retested for antimicrobial susceptibility in the California State Department of Health Services Microbial Diseases Laboratory with the proportion method24. The medium included the following concentrations of antimicrobial agents: isoniazid, 0.2 µg per milliliter; rifampin, 1 µg per milliliter; streptomycin, 2 µg per milliliter; and ethambutol, 5 µg per milliliter24. The isolates were considered to be resistant if there was more than 1 percent growth on medium containing antituberculous drugs as compared with the growth on drug-free medium.

The RFLP patterns of the isolates were determined according to internationally standardized procedures25. In brief, the organisms were grown in Dubos broth base supplemented with Dubos medium albumin (Difco Laboratories, Detroit) at 37 °C for two to four weeks. Bacterial cell walls were digested with lysozyme, proteinase K, and sodium dodecyl sulfate. Genomic DNA was extracted with cetyltrimethylammonium bromide, chloroform-isoamyl alcohol, and isopropanol and then digested with the restriction endonuclease PvuII. The resulting fragments were electrophoretically separated and transferred to nylon membranes, which were probed with a 245-base-pair fragment of the insertion sequence IS6110. Hybridizing fragments were detected by chemiluminescence (ECL kit, Amersham, Arlington Heights, Ill.).

Clinical data were collected by reviewing hospital and outpatient records. None of the patients received supervised therapy as outpatients; therefore, the degree of compliance with treatment was based on the patients' statements and clinic attendance.

Results

From April 1987 to July 1991, a total of 1318 patients had cultures that grew M. tuberculosis. Forty-eight of these patients met the selection criteria, in that they had persistently positive cultures for more than one year with drug-sensitive organisms (17 patients) or they had persistently positive cultures with increasingly drug-resistant organisms (31 patients). Sets of multiple isolates were available from 6 of the 17 patients with organisms that remained drug-sensitive for more than one year and from 11 of the 31 patients with organisms that manifested increasing drug resistance (Table 1). Sequential isolates from the remainder of the patients were not available, were not viable, or had become contaminated. This report focuses on the 17 patients with isolates that could be evaluated.

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. Epidemiologic and Clinical Characteristics of 6 Patients with Persistently Drug-Susceptible M. tuberculosis Isolates and 11 Patients with Drug-Resistant Isolates.

 
RFLP analysis of serial isolates from six patients (Patients 1 through 6 in Table 1) from whom drug-sensitive M. tuberculosis was persistently isolated demonstrated stable patterns (Figure 1). Likewise, the RFLP patterns of serial isolates from four patients (Patients 7, 8, 9, and 10 in Table 1) with organisms that became resistant during therapy also remained stable. The patterns of sequential isolates from two additional patients (Patients 11 and 12) infected with strains that had become resistant to rifampin during therapy were identical except for the development of one additional band (Figure 2). Thus, on the basis of the stability of these RFLP patterns over time, 12 of the 17 patients with serially positive cultures were judged to have been persistently infected with the strain originally isolated.


View larger version (76K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. RFLP Patterns of the Initial (A) and Final (B) Isolates from Six Patients with Persistently Drug-Susceptible Isolates of M. tuberculosis.

The specimens were obtained at the times shown in Table 1. The serial RFLP patterns of each pair of isolates were identical, indicating the continuing presence of the original strain. The last two lanes contain negative (M. avium complex) and positive (M. tuberculosis strain H37Rv) control DNA.

 

View larger version (72K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. RFLP Patterns of the Initial (A) and Final (B) Isolates from Six Patients Infected with Increasingly Drug-Resistant Strains of M. tuberculosis.

Except for the presence of one additional band (arrows) in Patients 11 and 12, the serial RFLP patterns of each pair of isolates were identical, indicating that the initially infecting strain acquired antimicrobial resistance during therapy. The last two lanes contain negative (M. avium complex) and positive (M. tuberculosis strain H37Rv) control DNA.

 
Five patients whose initial isolates had been drug-sensitive (Patients 13 through 17) had an organism resistant to at least isoniazid and rifampin isolated during the study period. In each case, the RFLP patterns of the original drug-sensitive strains dramatically differed from the pattern of the multidrug-resistant strains obtained subsequently (Figure 3), indicating that the patients may have been infected with a new strain during therapy for the initial infection. The RFLP patterns of the multidrug-resistant strains isolated from these five patients were identical (except for one additional band in an isolate from Patient 17), pointing to the possibility that the same strain may have infected all these patients. Indeed, three of these patients (Patients 15, 16, and 17) had been hospitalized in the same open tuberculosis unit and at the same time as other patients who were infected with this strain. The same RFLP pattern as that for the multidrug-resistant strains isolated from Patients 13 through 17 has now been identified in multidrug-resistant strains isolated from at least 13 other patients at this hospital (unpublished data) and has been sporadically isolated in other New York City hospitals. However, although this is a common RFLP pattern in this region, it is different from the patterns of multidrug-resistant isolates from other, recently analyzed outbreaks of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (Crawford JT: personal communication).


View larger version (63K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. RFLP Patterns of the Initial (A) and Final (B) Isolates from Five Patients Whose Cultures Became Positive for Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis during or after Therapy for a Drug-Sensitive Isolate.

The serial RFLP patterns show dramatic changes, indicating exogenous reinfection with a multidrug-resistant strain. The apparent reinfection of Patient 13 was due to the artifactual acquisition of a new strain as a result of cross-contamination in the laboratory. The reinfecting multidrug-resistant organisms (B lanes) are identical, indicating probable recent infection from a common source. The last two lanes contain negative (M. avium complex) and positive (M. tuberculosis strain H37Rv) control DNA.

 
All five of the patients whose cultures grew this multidrug-resistant strain were treated initially with standard therapy for tuberculosis and showed appropriate clinical improvement (including negative mycobacterial cultures) before the cultures became positive with the multidrug-resistant strain. In four of these five patients (Patients 14, 15, 16, and 17), isolation of the multidrug-resistant strain was associated with clinical and microbiologic deterioration. The clinical course of these four patients is depicted in Figure 4. Multiple cultures from each of these patients grew the multidrug-resistant strain of M. tuberculosis shown in Figure 3. Two weeks after being discharged from the hospital after treatment for Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia, Patient 14 had new pulmonary symptoms in association with the appearance of the multidrug-resistant strain in his sputum; at the time he was still receiving isoniazid and rifampin for the initial, drug-sensitive strain. Patient 15 was treated as an inpatient for three weeks and then as an outpatient for six additional weeks for his drug-sensitive strain before he discontinued therapy. His cultures became positive for the multidrug-resistant strain nine weeks after he was discharged from the hospital and only three weeks after he discontinued therapy. A sputum culture obtained from Patient 16 on the day antituberculous agents were discontinued for the initial infection grew the multidrug-resistant strain of M. tuberculosis. He had persistent symptoms and an additional 15 positive cultures over the ensuing nine-month period. Patient 17 was readmitted with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis 10 weeks after having been discharged from the hospital after treatment for P. carinii pneumonia.


View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 4. Clinical Course of the Four Patients with the Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome Who Were Exogenously Reinfected with Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis.

The chart spans the time from the diagnosis of tuberculosis until death for Patients 14, 15, and 17. Patient 16 died six months after the last contact shown. The large, solidly outlined boxes represent periods of in-hospital therapy and indicate the chief reasons for the hospitalizations: tuberculosis (TB) or P. carinii pneumonia (PCP). The triangles represent outpatient visits. The circles indicate negative cultures for M. tuberculosis, and the boxes positive cultures. The large dashed boxes indicate the duration of therapies (those shown are limited to the antituberculous agents administered). I denotes isoniazid, R rifampin, E ethambutol, P pyrazinamide, and S streptomycin.

 
In one of the five patients in whom multidrug-resistant tuberculosis had apparently developed during therapy for drug-sensitive tuberculosis (Patient 13), the isolation of the multidrug-resistant strain may not have reflected the onset of a new clinical episode, but rather may have been due to the contamination of a sterile culture during the processing of the patient's specimen in the laboratory. This patient had improved clinically with initial antimicrobial therapy and had multiple negative sputum cultures. Then, unexpectedly and without new clinical findings, he was found to have the multidrug-resistant strain of M. tuberculosis in one of numerous, otherwise negative sputum cultures. He continued to be clinically well despite only having received antimicrobial agents to which the newly isolated organism was resistant. A review of the mycobacteriology-laboratory records showed that a sputum specimen from another patient with the multidrug-resistant strain of M. tuberculosis was processed the same day as the specimen from Patient 13 (data not shown). Thus, cross-contamination had probably occurred in the laboratory, a problem that has been previously documented with phage typing26 and has been proved to have occurred on several occasions during the RFLP-based investigations (unpublished data).

Discussion

The resurgence of tuberculosis in the United States has been accompanied by alarming outbreaks of the disease caused by organisms resistant to multiple antituberculous drugs. The organisms isolated from patients in these outbreaks have generally been resistant to both isoniazid and rifampin, the most effective antituberculous drugs available3,4,5,7,8,9,10,11. A large proportion of these patients have been infected with HIV, and the case fatality rate has been extremely high10. The multidrug-resistant organisms have also been transmitted to persons without HIV infection in health care facilities11. Together with the lack of effective drugs for second-line treatment and methods of chemoprophylaxis, the transmission of multidrug-resistant strains of M. tuberculosis may be creating a substantial reservoir of latently infected people that will result in clinical multidrug-resistant tuberculosis for many years to come. Thus, there is an urgent need to understand the means by which this disease develops so that appropriate preventive strategies can be devised and implemented.

It is currently assumed, on the basis of studies conducted in the pre-HIV era, that drug resistance in tuberculosis develops by one of two mechanisms. Acquired drug resistance develops during treatment for drug-sensitive tuberculosis with regimens that are poorly conceived or poorly complied with, allowing the emergence of naturally occurring, drug-resistant mutants. Resistant organisms from affected patients may subsequently infect other people who have not been previously infected with M. tuberculosis, resulting in primary drug resistance13. In the current study, the use of RFLP analysis confirmed the development of acquired drug resistance in Patients 7 through 12. More importantly, however, it demonstrated through the RFLP analysis of isolates from Patients 14 through 17 that drug-resistant tuberculosis can develop by a third mechanism -- namely, exogenous reinfection with a new multidrug-resistant strain of M. tuberculosis during or after therapy for drug-sensitive tuberculosis.

The six patients in this study (Patients 7 through 12) whose original strains became resistant to antimicrobial agents during treatment had persistently positive cultures consisting of the same strain of M. tuberculosis with which they were initially infected (Figure 2). This demonstrated that their original strains had acquired drug resistance as classically defined. The development of acquired drug resistance can be prevented by ensuring that all patients comply with appropriate multidrug regimens.

In contrast, the dramatic change in the RFLP patterns of isolates from four patients (Patients 14, 15, 16, and 17) indicates that the multidrug-resistant strain isolated late in the course of infection in these patients was different from the strains that initially caused their tuberculosis. The isolation of a new multidrug-resistant strain from these patients indicates exogenous reinfection after successful eradication of the initial strain. In each of these cases the multidrug-resistant strain was isolated on multiple occasions during clinical episodes of active tuberculosis, so these patients had authentic infections with this strain, not artifactual infections due to cross-contamination of negative cultures in the laboratory.

The possibility that persons previously infected with M. tuberculosis can be exogenously reinfected has been debated for decades27,28,29. However, it was thought to occur rarely because of the immunity conferred by the initial infection. On the few occasions in which exogenous reinfection has been documented, it has involved only selected populations -- for example, alcoholic residents of a homeless shelter1. The four HIV-infected patients in this report (Patients 14, 15, 16, and 17) who were documented by RFLP analysis to have had a new infection with a multidrug-resistant strain are likely to have been reinfected because they were reexposed to M. tuberculosis and had not acquired protective immunity to the bacteria during their original infection. This lack of acquired immunity to M. tuberculosis, which permitted reinfection with a multidrug-resistant strain, presumably would also predispose HIV-infected persons to reinfection with drug-sensitive organisms. If so, exogenous reinfection might lead to second episodes of tuberculosis among substantial numbers of HIV-infected persons. Whether normal hosts can also be exogenously reinfected, and if so, how frequently, has not been determined.

The observation that HIV-infected patients with treated or cured tuberculosis might have subsequent episodes of tuberculosis as a result of exogenous reinfection with M. tuberculosis complicates the evaluation of clinical trials of chemotherapeutic and chemoprophylactic regimens. Currently, relapses after therapy are assumed to result from inadequacies in the regimen's efficacy or in patient compliance. However, if exogenous reinfection is found to be common, relapse may reflect the reinfection of persons whose initial therapy was completely adequate. RFLP analysis on the initial isolates and those obtained during relapse can detect exogenous reinfection. Similarly, patients with advanced HIV infection who have completed effective chemoprophylactic regimens may remain susceptible to reinfection that would appear to result from failure of chemoprophylaxis.

The lack of protective immunity to M. tuberculosis after therapy in HIV-infected patients also complicates efforts to control the disease. Persons who have been infected previously with M. tuberculosis are assumed to be resistant to reinfection, and as such they are neither specifically instructed to avoid further exposure nor reevaluated if such exposure occurs. However, the apparent susceptibility of HIV-infected patients to exogenous reinfection suggests that those who have a history of tuberculosis or known tuberculin reactivity need to be evaluated for the possible development of a new episode of tuberculosis after contact with someone whose disease is infectious, as has been recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention30. Open tuberculosis units, which are maintained in only a few American hospitals but which are common in developing countries, may place immunocompromised patients at considerable risk for reinfection.

It is not possible to infer from this study the frequency with which patients are reinfected with M. tuberculosis. Future studies are needed to define the frequency, settings, and specific risk factors for exogenous reinfection with M. tuberculosis. If future studies demonstrate that reinfection is common in this patient population, a fundamental change in the emphasis of efforts to control the disease may be necessary. The occurrence of persistent, exquisite susceptibility of HIV-infected patients to M. tuberculosis would mandate a shift in focus from the current, two-pronged approach of identifying and treating persons with latent infection and active disease31 to include a third prong, the identification and elimination of circumstances that foster the transmission of M. tuberculosis.

Supported by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the California Statewide AIDS Task Force, and Public Health Service grants (AI07089-11 and AI27762-03).

We are indebted to Janice Lopez of the Microbial Diseases Laboratory, California Department of Health Services, for performing susceptibility tests according to the proportion method.


Source Information

From the Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine, and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (P.M.S., S.P.S., G.K.S.) and the Department of Medicine, Centers for AIDS Research (R.W.S.), Stanford University, Stanford, Calif.; the Medical Service, San Francisco General Hospital and the University of California, San Francisco (P.C.H.); the Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases (M.J.M.), and the Department of Pathology (M.F.S.), State University of New York Health Sciences Center at Brooklyn, Brooklyn; and the California Department of Health Services Microbial Diseases Laboratory, Berkeley (E.D.).

Address reprint requests to Dr. Small at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Rm. 251, Beckman Ctr., Stanford, CA 94306.

References

  1. Nardell E, McInnis B, Thomas B, Weidhaas S. Exogenous reinfection with tuberculosis in a shelter for the homeless. N Engl J Med 1986;315:1570-1575. [Abstract]
  2. Reves R, Blakey D, Snider DE Jr, Farer LS. Transmission of multiple drug-resistant tuberculosis: report of a school and community outbreak. Am J Epidemiol 1981;113:423-435. [Free Full Text]
  3. Nosocomial transmission of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis to health-care workers and HIV-infected patients in an urban hospital -- Florida. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1990;39:718-722. [Medline]
  4. Transmission of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis from an HIV-positive client in a residential substance-abuse treatment facility -- Michigan. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1991;40:129-131. [Medline]
  5. Nosocomial transmission of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis among HIV-infected persons -- Florida and New York, 1988-1991. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1991;40:585-591. [Medline]
  6. Dooley SW, Villarino ME, Lawrence M, et al. Nosocomial transmission of tuberculosis in a hospital unit for HIV-infected patients. JAMA 1992;267:2632-2634. [Abstract]
  7. Edlin BR, Tokars JI, Grieco MH, et al. An outbreak of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis among hospitalized patients with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. N Engl J Med 1992;326:1514-1521. [Abstract]
  8. Fischl MA, Uttamchandani RB, Daikos GL, et al. An outbreak of tuberculosis caused by multiple-drug-resistant tubercle bacilli among patients with HIV infection. Ann Intern Med 1992;117:177-183.
  9. Pearson ML, Jereb JA, Frieden TR, et al. Nosocomial transmission of multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a risk to patients and health care workers. Ann Intern Med 1992;117:191-196.
  10. Dooley SW, Jarvis WR, Martone WJ, Snider DE Jr. Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Ann Intern Med 1992;117:257-259.
  11. Beck-Sague C, Dooley SW, Hutton MD, et al. Hospital outbreak of multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis infections: factors in transmission to staff and HIV-infected patients. JAMA 1992;268:1280-1286. [Abstract]
  12. National action plan to combat multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1992;41:5-48.
  13. Drug resistence in mycobacteria. In: Gangadharam PRJ. Definitions of drug resistance. New York: Academic Press, 1984:7.
  14. Hermans PW, van Soolingen D, Dale JW, et al. Insertion element IS986 from Mycobacterium tuberculosis: a useful tool for diagnosis and epidemiology of tuberculosis. J Clin Microbiol 1990;28:2051-2058. [Free Full Text]
  15. Eisenach KD, Crawford JT, Bates JH. Repetitive DNA sequences as probes for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J Clin Microbiol 1988;26:2240-2245. [Free Full Text]
  16. Mazurek GH, Cave MD, Eisenach KD, Wallace RJ Jr, Bates JH, Crawford JT. Chromosomal DNA fingerprint patterns produced with IS6110 as strain-specific markers for epidemiologic study of tuberculosis. J Clin Microbiol 1991;29:2030-2033. [Free Full Text]
  17. van Soolingen D, Hermans PW, de Haas PEW, Soll DR, van Embden JDA. Occurrence and stability of insertion sequences in Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex strains: evaluation of an insertion sequence-dependent DNA polymorphism as a tool in the epidemiology of tuberculosis. J Clin Microbiol 1991;29:2578-2586. [Free Full Text]
  18. Otal E, Martin C, Vincent-Levy-Frebault V, Thierry D, Gicquel B. Restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis using IS6110 as an epidemiologic marker in tuberculosis. J Clin Microbiol 1992;29:1252-1254. 
  19. van Embden JDA, van Soolingen D, Small PM, Hermans PWM. Genetic markers for the epidemiology of tuberculosis. Res Microbiol 1992;143:385-391. [Medline]
  20. Daley CL, Small PM, Schecter GF, et al. An outbreak of tuberculosis with accelerated progression among persons infected with the human immunodeficiency virus: an analysis using restriction-fragment-length polymorphisms. N Engl J Med 1992;326:231-235. [Abstract]
  21. Godfrey-Faussett P, Mortimer PR, Jenkins PA, Stoker NG. Evidence of transmission of tuberculosis by DNA fingerprinting. BMJ 1992;305:221-223.
  22. Shafer RW, Chirgwin KD, Glatt AE, Dahdouh MA, Landesman SH, Suster B. HIV prevalence, immunosuppression, and drug resistance in patients with tuberculosis in an area endemic for AIDS. AIDS 1991;5:399-405. [Medline]
  23. Shafer RW, Kim DS, Weiss JP, Quale JM. Extrapulmonary tuberculosis in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Medicine (Baltimore) 1991;70:384-397. [Medline]
  24. Antimycobacterial susceptibility testing: proposed standards. Villanova, Pa.: National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, 1990. (NCCLS publication M24-P).
  25. van Embden JDA, Cave MD, Crawford JT, et al. Strain identification of Mycobacterium tuberculosis by DNA fingerprinting: recommendations for a standardized methodology. J Clin Microbiol 1993;31:406-409. [Free Full Text]
  26. Jones WD Jr. Bacteriophage typing of Mycobacterium tuberculosis cultures from incidents of suspected laboratory cross-contamination. Tubercle 1988;69:43-46. [CrossRef][Medline]
  27. Exogenous or endogenous reinfection: is an arrested primary infection protective or deleterious? In: Rich AR. The pathogenesis of tuberculosis. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C Thomas, 1944:779-810.
  28. Stead WW. Pathogenesis of a first episode of chronic pulmonary tuberculosis in man: recrudescence of residuals of the primary infection or exogenous reinfection? Am Rev Respir Dis 1967;95:729-745. [Medline]
  29. Romeyn JA. Exogenous reinfection in tuberculosis. Am Rev Respir Dis 1970;101:923-927. [Medline]
  30. Management of persons exposed to multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1992;41:61-71.
  31. Snider DE, Roper WL. The new tuberculosis. N Engl J Med 1992;326:703-705. [Medline]

 

This Article
-Abstract

Commentary
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation

Related Letters:

Reinfection with Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis
Nolan C. M., Lin B. T.-y., Small P. M., Shafer R. W., Schoolnik G. K.
Extract | Full Text  
N Engl J Med 1993; 329:811-812, Sep 9, 1993. Correspondence

This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.