TY - JOUR T1 - Whole genome sequence analysis of <em>Salmonella</em> Typhi in Papua New Guinea reveals an established population of genotype 2.1.7 sensitive to antimicrobials JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2021.09.27.21264209 SP - 2021.09.27.21264209 AU - Zoe A. Dyson AU - Elisheba Malau AU - Paul F. Horwood AU - Rebecca Ford AU - Valentine Siba AU - Mition Yoannes AU - William Pomat AU - Megan Passey AU - Louise M. Judd AU - Danielle J. Ingle AU - Deborah A. Williamson AU - Gordon Dougan AU - Andrew R. Greenhill AU - Kathryn E. Holt Y1 - 2021/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/09/29/2021.09.27.21264209.abstract N2 - Background Typhoid fever, a systemic infection caused by Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi, remains a considerable public health threat in impoverished regions within many low- and middle-income settings. However, we still lack a detailed understanding of the emergence, population structure, molecular mechanisms of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and transmission dynamics of S. Typhi across many settings, particularly throughout the Asia-Pacific islands. Here we present a comprehensive whole genome sequence (WGS) based overview of S. Typhi populations circulating in Papua New Guinea (PNG) over 30 years.Principle findings Bioinformatic analysis of 86 S. Typhi isolates collected between 1980-2010 demonstrated that the population structure of PNG is dominated by a single genotype (2.1.7) that appears to have emerged in the Indonesian archipelago in the mid-twentieth century with very limited evidence of inter-country transmission. Genotypic and phenotypic data demonstrated that the PNG S. Typhi population appears to be susceptible to former first line drugs for treating typhoid fever (chloramphenicol, ampicillin and co-trimoxazole), as well as fluoroquinolones, third generation cephalosporins, and macrolides. PNG genotype 2.1.7 was genetically conserved, with very few deletions, and no evidence of plasmid or prophage acquisition. Genetic variation among this population was attributed to either single point mutations, or homologous recombination adjacent to repetitive ribosomal RNA operons.Significance Antimicrobials remain an effective option for the treatment of typhoid fever in PNG, along with other intervention strategies including improvements to water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) related infrastructure and potentially the introduction of Vi-conjugate vaccines. However, continued genomic surveillance is warranted to monitor for the emergence of AMR within local populations, or the introduction of AMR associated genotypes of S. Typhi in this setting.Author Summary Typhoid fever, caused by Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi, is a systemic infection common to many low- to middle-income settings. While the population structure of S. Typhi has been genetically characterised using whole genome sequencing in many endemic countries throughout Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, we are still lacking a detailed understanding for many regions including those among the Asia-Pacific islands. Genomic surveillance of isolates spanning 30 years demonstrated a population structure of S. Typhi in Papua New Guinea (PNG) dominated by a single genotype (2.1.7) that emerged in the mid-twentieth century, is genetically homogeneous, and sensitive to a wide range of antibiotics commonly used in the treatment of typhoid. There was little evidence of inter-country transmission and the setting appeared free of S. Typhi genotypes commonly associated with AMR e.g. H58 (genotype 4.3.1). These data suggest that former first line drugs (chloramphenicol, ampicillin and co-trimoxazole), fluoroquinolones, third generation cephalosporins and macrolides all remain viable options for controlling typhoid in addition to the introduction of Vi-conjugate vaccines and improvements to water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH) related infrastructure. Routine molecular surveillance is necessary to monitor for introduced or emerging AMR to inform treatment guidelines and intervention strategies.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementZAD was supported by a grant funded by the Wellcome Trust (STRATAA 106158/Z/14/Z), and received funding from the European Unions Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement TyphiNET (#845681). DJI was supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Emerging Leadership Fellowship (GNT1195210). DAW is supported by an NHMRC Emerging Leadership Fellowship (GNT1174555). KEH was supported by a Senior Medical Research Fellowship from the Viertel Foundation of Australia, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle (grant #OPP1175797). This work was supported, in whole or in part, by the Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1175797]. Under the grant conditions of the Foundation, a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Generic License has already been assigned to the Author Accepted Manuscript version that might arise from this submission. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical approval for this study was granted by the PNG Institute of Medical Research Institutional Review Board (1609), the PNG Medical Research Advisory Board (MRAC 16.43) and the Federation University Human Research Ethics Committee (A17-074).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesGenomic data are submitted to the European Nucleotide Archive (ENA) and accession numbers are available in the supplementary tables. ER -