Comparing IS6110‐RFLP, PGRS‐RFLP and IS6110‐Mtb1/Mtb2 PCR methods for genotyping of Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates

Aims Tuberculosis (TB) is still an important disease in the world, especially in developing countries. Applying efficient and suitable methods for genotyping Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) isolates is a crucial step for identifying the MTB transmission mode and controlling its subsequent outcomes. Considering the complexity of IS6110‐RFLP and PGRS‐RFLP methods for MTB classification, suggesting other simple but reliable techniques could be helpful in the MTB studies, especially in low‐income countries. Methods and Results This study aimed to evaluate the capabilities of three methods for genotyping MTB isolates collected from Iran through comparing our previously published results for IS6110‐RFLP and PGRS‐RFLP methods and current results obtained from IS6110‐Mtb1/Mtb2 PCR technique. A strong concordance was observed between the results of clustering by three techniques. Calculated Kendall’s Tau concordance value for correlation of IS6110‐RFLP and IS6110‐Mtb1/Mtb2 PCR, for IS6110‐RFLP and PGRS‐RFLP, and for IS6110‐Mtb1/Mtb2 PCR and PGRS‐RFLP techniques was equal to 0·943, 0·898 and 0·85 respectively. Conclusions A strong correlation between IS6110‐Mtb1/Mtb2 PCR, and IS6110‐RFLP and PGRS‐RFLP methods was observed and therefore IS6110‐Mtb1/Mtb2 PCR discriminates MTBs capably. Significance and Impact of the Study The study showed that IS6110‐Mtb1/Mtb2 PCR, which is a simple and economical MTB genotyping approach, could be a more appropriate method to be applied in the low‐budget research programmes.