Real-time analysis of nanopore-based metagenomic sequencing from infected orthopaedic devices

Nicholas D Sanderson, Teresa L Street, Dona Foster, Jeremy Swann, Bridget L Atkins, Andrew J Brent, Martin A McNally, Sarah Oakley, Adrian Taylor, Tim E A Peto, Derrick W Crook, David W Eyre, Nicholas D Sanderson, Teresa L Street, Dona Foster, Jeremy Swann, Bridget L Atkins, Andrew J Brent, Martin A McNally, Sarah Oakley, Adrian Taylor, Tim E A Peto, Derrick W Crook, David W Eyre

Abstract

Background: Prosthetic joint infections are clinically difficult to diagnose and treat. Previously, we demonstrated metagenomic sequencing on an Illumina MiSeq replicates the findings of current gold standard microbiological diagnostic techniques. Nanopore sequencing offers advantages in speed of detection over MiSeq. Here, we report a real-time analytical pathway for Nanopore sequence data, designed for detecting bacterial composition of prosthetic joint infections but potentially useful for any microbial sequencing, and compare detection by direct-from-clinical-sample metagenomic nanopore sequencing with Illumina sequencing and standard microbiological diagnostic techniques.

Results: DNA was extracted from the sonication fluids of seven explanted orthopaedic devices, and additionally from two culture negative controls, and was sequenced on the Oxford Nanopore Technologies MinION platform. A specific analysis pipeline was assembled to overcome the challenges of identifying the true infecting pathogen, given high levels of host contamination and unavoidable background lab and kit contamination. The majority of DNA classified (> 90%) was host contamination and discarded. Using negative control filtering thresholds, the species identified corresponded with both routine microbiological diagnosis and MiSeq results. By analysing sequences in real time, causes of infection were robustly detected within minutes from initiation of sequencing.

Conclusions: We demonstrate a novel, scalable pipeline for real-time analysis of MinION sequence data and use of this pipeline to show initial proof of concept that metagenomic MinION sequencing can provide rapid, accurate diagnosis for prosthetic joint infections. The high proportion of human DNA in prosthetic joint infection extracts prevents full genome analysis from complete coverage, and methods to reduce this could increase genome depth and allow antimicrobial resistance profiling. The nine samples sequenced in this pilot study have shown a proof of concept for sequencing and analysis that will enable us to investigate further sequencing to improve specificity and sensitivity.

Keywords: Clinical; Device-related infection; Metagenomics; Nanopore; Prosthetic joint infection; Real-time.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

For this study, no ethical review was required, because the study was a laboratory method development study focusing on bacterial DNA extracted from discarded samples identified only by laboratory numbers, with no personal or identifiable data. Sequencing reads identified as human on the basis of Centrifuge were counted and immediately discarded.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Diagram of analysis process. a MinION sequencing using MinKNOW (runs outside of CRuMPIT). b Fast5 files are detected and submitted as batches for the Nextflow workflow. c Nextflow workflow which is contained within a singularity image and can be distributed across a cluster (SLURM used here) or on a local machine. d Run analysis using data pushed to a MongoDB database, this can be conducted separately on any machine with network access to the database. Each component (green or blue rounded rectangle) of CRuMPIT can be run independently from the same or different networked computers, (e) or the entire process can be run from a single program. Square rectangles represent programs, some of which are within python wrappers. Arrows represent direction of data transfer within the workflow or between componants
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Cumulative bases classified by Centrifuge and minimap2 reference alignment over the first few hours of sequencing on the MinION. Each marker on the plots represents a new sequence classified. Times are on the day of sequencing and taken from the read timestamp and doesn’t include bioinformatic time. Three samples shown showcasing the best and worst performers. a Sample 354a containing three different species. b Sample 249a containing Cutibacterium acne. c Sample 352a containing two different Bacillus species
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Percentage of mapped bases (minimap2) to total centrifuge classified bacterial bases over the first two hours of sequencing. As with Fig. 2, each marker on the plots represents a new sequence classified. Times are on the day of sequencing. Three samples shown showcasing the best and worst performers. a Sample 354a containing three different species. b Sample 249a containing Cutibacterium acne. c Sample 352a containing two different Bacillus species

References

    1. Matthews P. C, Berendt A. R, McNally M. A, Byren I. Diagnosis and management of prosthetic joint infection. BMJ. 2009;338(may29 1):b1773–b1773. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b1773.
    1. Huotari K, Peltola M, Jamsen E. The incidence of late prosthetic joint infections: a registry-based study of 112,708 primary hip and knee replacements. Acta Orthop. 2015;86:321–325. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2015.1035173.
    1. Lenguerrand E, Whitehouse MR, Beswick AD, Jones SA, Porter ML, Blom AW. Revision for prosthetic joint infection following hip arthroplasty: evidence from the National Joint Registry. Bone Jt Res. 2017;6:391–398. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.66.BJR-2017-0003.R1.
    1. Lenguerrand E, Whitehouse MR, Beswick AD, Toms AD, Porter ML, Blom AW, et al. Description of the rates, trends and surgical burden associated with revision for prosthetic joint infection following primary and revision knee replacements in England and Wales: an analysis of the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ire. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e014056. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014056.
    1. Kurtz Steven M., Lau Edmund, Watson Heather, Schmier Jordana K., Parvizi Javad. Economic Burden of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in the United States. The Journal of Arthroplasty. 2012;27(8):61-65.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.02.022.
    1. Rochford ET, Richards RG, Moriarty TF. Influence of material on the development of device-associated infections. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012;18:1162–1167. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2012.04002.x.
    1. Atkins BL, Athanasou N, Deeks JJ, Crook DW, Simpson H, Peto TE, et al. Prospective evaluation of criteria for microbiological diagnosis of prosthetic-joint infection at revision arthroplasty. The OSIRIS collaborative study group. J Clin Microbiol. 1998;36:2932–2939.
    1. Osmon DR, Berbari EF, Berendt AR, Lew D, Zimmerli W, Steckelberg JM, et al. Diagnosis and management of prosthetic joint infection: clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56:e1–25. doi: 10.1093/cid/cis803.
    1. Bejon P, Berendt A, Atkins BL, Green N, Parry H, Masters S, et al. Two-stage revision for prosthetic joint infection: predictors of outcome and the role of reimplantation microbiology. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65:569–575. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkp469.
    1. Marín M, Garcia-Lechuz JM, Alonso P, Villanueva M, Alcalá L, Gimeno M, et al. Role of universal 16S rRNA gene PCR and sequencing in diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection. J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50:583–589. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00170-11.
    1. Street TL, Sanderson ND, Atkins BL, Brent AJ, Cole K, Foster D, et al. Molecular diagnosis of orthopaedic device infection direct from sonication fluid by metagenomic sequencing. J Clin Microbiol. 2017;55(8):2334–2347. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00462-17.
    1. Ruppe E, Lazarevic V, Girard M, Mouton W, Ferry T, Laurent F, et al. Clinical metagenomics of bone and joint infections: a proof of concept study. Sci Rep. 2017;7:7718. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-07546-5.
    1. Greninger AL, Naccache SN, Federman S, Yu G, Mbala P, Bres V, et al. Rapid metagenomic identification of viral pathogens in clinical samples by real-time nanopore sequencing analysis. Genome Med. 2015;7:99. doi: 10.1186/s13073-015-0220-9.
    1. Mitsuhashi S, Kryukov K, Nakagawa S, Takeuchi JS, Shiraishi Y, Asano K, et al. A portable system for rapid bacterial composition analysis using a nanopore-based sequencer and laptop computer. Sci Rep. 2017;7:5657. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-05772-5.
    1. Hassan AA, Ülbegi-Mohyla H, Kanbar T, Alber J, Lämmler C, Abdulmawjood A, et al. Phenotypic and genotypic characterization of arcanobacterium haemolyticum isolates from infections of horses. J Clin Microbiol. 2009;47:124–128. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01933-08.
    1. Di Tommaso P, Chatzou M, Floden EW, Barja PP, Palumbo E, Notredame C. Nextflow enables reproducible computational workflows. Nat Biotechnol. 2017;35:316–319. doi: 10.1038/nbt.3820.
    1. Kurtzer GM, Sochat V, Bauer MW. Singularity: scientific containers for mobility of compute. PLoS One. 2017;12:1–20. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177459.
    1. What is docker. 2017. . Accessed Nov 2017.
    1. Sanderson ND. Clinincal Real-time Metagenomics Pathogen Identification Test (CRuMPIT). . Accessed Nov 2017.
    1. Wick RR, Judd LM, Holt KE. Comparison Of Oxford Nanopore Basecalling Tools. 2017. doi:10.5281/ZENODO.1043612.
    1. Sanderson ND. . 2017. . Accessed Nov 2017.
    1. Wick RR. Porechop. 2018. . Accessed Nov 2017.
    1. Schmieder R, Edwards R. Quality control and preprocessing of metagenomic datasets. Bioinformatics. 2011;27:863–864. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr026.
    1. Kim D, Song L, Breitwieser FP, Salzberg SL. Centrifuge: rapid and sensitive classification of metagenomic sequences. Genome Res. 2016;26:1721–1729. doi: 10.1101/gr.210641.116.
    1. Wood DE, Salzberg SL. Kraken: ultrafast metagenomic sequence classification using exact alignments. Genome Biol. 2014;15:R46. doi: 10.1186/gb-2014-15-3-r46.
    1. Li H. Minimap2: fast pairwise alignment for long nucleotide sequences. 2017:2–5. 10.1101/169557.
    1. Jette MA, Yoo AB, Grondona M. SLURM: simple Linux utility for resource management. In: In Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Proceedings of Job Scheduling Strategies for Parallel Processing (JSSPP) 2003. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2002. p. 44–60. .
    1. Helgason E, Økstad OA, Caugant DA, Johansen HA, Fouet A, Mock M, et al. Bacillus anthracis, Bacillus cereus, and bacillus thuringiensis - one species on the basis of genetic evidence. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000;66:2627–2630. doi: 10.1128/AEM.66.6.2627-2630.2000.
    1. Kearney MF, Spindler J, Wiegand A, Shao W, Anderson EM, Maldarelli F, et al. Multiple sources of contamination in samples from patients reported to have XMRV infection. PLoS One. 2012;7:e30889. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0030889.
    1. Schmidt K, Mwaigwisya S, Crossman LC, Doumith M, Munroe D, Pires C, et al. Identification of bacterial pathogens and antimicrobial resistance directly from clinical urines by nanopore-based metagenomic sequencing. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017;72:104–114. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkw397.
    1. Brown BL, Watson M, Minot SS, Rivera MC, Franklin RB. MinION nanopore sequencing of environmental metagenomes: a synthetic approach. Gigascience. 2017;6:1–10. doi: 10.1093/gigascience/gix007.
    1. Jones MB, Highlander SK, Anderson EL, Li W, Dayrit M, Klitgord N, et al. Library preparation methodology can influence genomic and functional predictions in human microbiome research. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2015;112:14024–14029. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1519288112.
    1. Schirmer M, D’Amore R, Ijaz UZ, Hall N, Quince C. Illumina error profiles: resolving fine-scale variation in metagenomic sequencing data. BMC Bioinformatics. 2016;17:125. doi: 10.1186/s12859-016-0976-y.
    1. Pysam. . Accessed Nov 2017.
    1. Cock PJA, Antao T, Chang JT, Chapman BA, Cox CJ, Dalke A, et al. Biopython: freely available Python tools for computational molecular biology and bioinformatics. Bioinformatics. 2009;25:1422–1423. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp163.
    1. McKinney W. pandas: a Foundational Python Library for Data Analysis and Statistics. Python High Perform Sci Comput. 2011. p. 1–9. .
    1. Hunter JD. Matplotlib: a 2D graphics environment. Comput Sci Eng. 2007;9:90–95. doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55.
    1. Huerta-Cepas J, Serra F, Bork P. ETE 3: reconstruction, analysis, and visualization of Phylogenomic data. Mol Biol Evol. 2016;33:1635–1638. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msw046.
    1. Oliphant TE. Guide to NumPy. Trelgol Publ. 2006;1:378. doi: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2015.02.001.

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera