Library
PubMed Central Open Access
research article
Professional
Open access

Whole-genome and pan-genome analyses reveal genomic differences among nontypeableisolates from bronchiectasis, community-acquired pneumonia, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Source: PubMed Central Open Access, NCBI / U.S. National Library of Medicine

Frontiers in Cellular and Infection MicrobiologyLast synced 8/23/2026Status: syncedPMID: 42630188 pmidDOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2026.1827485

Background Nontypeable(NTHi) is a major bacterial pathogen in both acute and chronic respiratory diseases, yet the genomic basis underlying its association with different clinical phenotypes remains incompletely understood. Methods We performed whole-genome sequencing and comparative genomic analysis of 27 NTHi isolates, including strains derived from patients with bronchiectasis (n = 10), community-acquired pneumonia (CAP; n = 6), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; n = 11). Among these, three isolates (one from each disease group) were newly sequenced using a hybrid Oxford Nanopore–Illumina approach, while the remaining 24 genomes were retrieved from public databases. Pan-genome analysis, multilocus sequence typing (MLST), core genome phylogenetic analysis, accessory genome based discriminant analysis, and pan-genome-wide association analysis (pan-GWAS) were performed to characterize genomic diversity and variation in gene content across isolates. Results MLST and core genome phylogenetic analyses revealed substantial genetic diversity, with isolates from bronchiectasis, CAP, and COPD distributed across multiple lineages without clear disease-specific clustering. Accessory genome–based analyses indicated heterogeneous differences in gene content among isolates from different clinical backgrounds, although overlap between groups remained evident. Pan-genome-wide association analysis did not identify any accessory genes that remained statistically significant aft

Abstract

Background Nontypeable(NTHi) is a major bacterial pathogen in both acute and chronic respiratory diseases, yet the genomic basis underlying its association with different clinical phenotypes remains incompletely understood. Methods We performed whole-genome sequencing and comparative genomic analysis of 27 NTHi isolates, including strains derived from patients with bronchiectasis (n = 10), community-acquired pneumonia (CAP; n = 6), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; n = 11). Among these, three isolates (one from each disease group) were newly sequenced using a hybrid Oxford Nanopore–Illumina approach, while the remaining 24 genomes were retrieved from public databases. Pan-genome analysis, multilocus sequence typing (MLST), core genome phylogenetic analysis, accessory genome based discriminant analysis, and pan-genome-wide association analysis (pan-GWAS) were performed to characterize genomic diversity and variation in gene content across isolates. Results MLST and core genome phylogenetic analyses revealed substantial genetic diversity, with isolates from bronchiectasis, CAP, and COPD distributed across multiple lineages without clear disease-specific clustering. Accessory genome–based analyses indicated heterogeneous differences in gene content among isolates from different clinical backgrounds, although overlap between groups remained evident. Pan-genome-wide association analysis did not identify any accessory genes that remained statistically significant after Benjamini–Hochberg false discovery rate (FDR) correction. Under a relaxed exploratory threshold (empirical P-value 1), a subset of accessory genes showing differential distribution patterns among disease groups was identified and reported as exploratory candidates. Comparatively greater accessory genome divergence was observed between bronchiectasis and COPD isolates. Functional annotation indicated that these candidate genes spanned multiple categories, including recombination, membrane-associated processes, transport, and nutrient utilization. Conclusions Clinical heterogeneity among NTHi isolates was not reflected in core genome phylogeny. Differences in accessory gene content were observed across isolates from different clinical sources; however, these patterns were not supported by statistically robust associations after multiple testing correction. The identified candidate genes should therefore be regarded as exploratory, and the findings interpreted as descriptive of genomic diversity rather than evidence of disease-associated functional differentiation.

Educational only
This information is for general education and is not medical advice. Always talk to a licensed U.S. clinician about your situation, medications, or treatment decisions.