Quantifying patient- and hospital-level antimicrobial resistance dynamics in Staphylococcus aureus from routinely collected data

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to all antibiotic classes has been found in the pathogen Staphylococcus aureus . The reported prevalence of these resistances vary, driven by within-host AMR evolution at the patient level, and between-host transmission at the hospital level. Without dense longitudinal sampling, pragmatic analysis of AMR dynamics at multiple levels using routine surveillance data is essential to inform control measures. We explored S. aureus AMR diversity in 70,000 isolates from a UK paediatric hospital between 2000-2020, using electronic datasets containing multiple routinely collected isolates per patient with phenotypic antibiograms, hospitalisation information, and antibiotic consumption. At the hospital-level, the proportion of isolates that were meticillin-resistant (MRSA) increased between 2014-2020 from 25 to 50%, before sharply decreasing to 30%, likely due to a change in inpatient demographics. Temporal trends in the proportion of isolates resistant to different antibiotics were often correlated in MRSA, but independent in meticillin-susceptible S. aureus . Ciprofloxacin resistance in MRSA decreased from 70% to 40% of tested isolates between 2007-2020, likely linked to a national policy to reduce fluoroquinolone usage in 2007. At the patient level, we identified frequent AMR diversity, with 4% of patients ever positive for S. aureus simultaneously carrying, at some point, multiple isolates with different resistances. We detected changes over time in AMR diversity in 3% of patients ever positive for S. aureus . These changes equally represented gain and loss of resistance. Within this routinely collected dataset, we found that 65% of changes in resistance within a patient’s S. aureus population could not be explained by antibiotic exposure or between-patient transmission of bacteria, suggesting that within-host evolution via frequent gain and loss of AMR genes may be responsible for these changing AMR profiles. Our study highlights the value of exploring existing routine surveillance data to determine underlying mechanisms of AMR. These insights may substantially improve our understanding of the importance of antibiotic exposure variation, and the success of single S. aureus clones. ### Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. ### Funding Statement Q.J.L and A.C were supported by a studentship from the Medical Research Council Intercollegiate Doctoral Training Program (MR/N013638/1). L.G was supported by grants from the Wellcome Trust (226007/Z/22/Z) and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health (1R01AI146338). G.M.K was supported by a Skills Development Fellowship from the Medical Research Council (MR/P014658/1). ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: Ethics committee of Great Ormond Street Hospital gave ethical approval for this work (under ethical approval 17/LO/0008 for use of routine GOSH data for research). Ethics committee of London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine gave ethical approval for this work (reference 26692). I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I 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). Yes I 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. Yes The raw datasets are the property of Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) and cannot be shared publicly. The processed anonymised datasets and the code to run the analyses are publicly available in a GitHub repository ().