Since the level of antimicrobial resistance in Bacteroides fragilis has increased, monitoring the antimicrobial susceptibility could be necessary. The objectives of this study were to (i) investigate the prevalence of species, the occurrence of reduced antimicrobial susceptibility (E‐test method), and antibiotic resistance genes in the B. fragilis group and (ii) evaluate the prevalence of enterotoxigenic B. fragilis and the distribution of bft gene subtypes in hospitalized patients. As many as 475 isolates out of 250 stool samples were detected to be B. fragilis group by using conventional biochemical tests (API‐32A system) and multiplex‐PCR. In addition, 48.2%, 13.9%, 76.6%, and 1.2% of B. fragilis group isolates were resistant (according to EUCAST breakpoint) to piperacillin‐tazobactam, meropenem, clindamycin, and metronidazole, respectively. Six metronidazole‐resistant strains were isolated; B. fragilis (n: 3), B. thetaiotaomicron, B. vulgates, and B. ovatus. The presence of the cfiA, cepA, ermF, and nim genes was observed in 3.8%, 15.9%, 34.1%, and 0.7% of the B. fragilis isolates, respectively. One hundred thirty‐two B. fragilis isolates (27.8%)and 21 B  fragilis isolates (15.9%) turned out to be bft gene positive by multiplex‐PCR; eleven isolates (52.4%) harbored bft‐1, eight isolates (38%) harbored bft‐2 isotypes, and two isolates (9.5%) harbored bft‐3 isotype (16.66%). These bacteria harbor antimicrobial resistance genes that could be transferred to other susceptible intestinal strains. Further investigations on lineage analysis are needed for a better understanding of these bacteria in Iran.

Background: Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in men in Iran. It can be treated in the early stages of the disease; therefore, early diagnosis can be lifesaving. The aim of this study was to investigate the molecular expression of some oncogenes and predisposing behaviors contributing to the aggressiveness of prostate cancer. Methods: In this case-control study, prostate cancer specimens were collected from both patients and healthy volunteers. Several factors such as age, family history, smoking, and stage of the disease, were investigated based on the criteria of this study. Real-time PCR was used to measure the expression of four oncogenes. Statistical analysis of our data was carried out using SPSS software version 22. Results: The X 2 test showed that there was a difference in the incidence of prostate cancer in different age groups (X 2 = 9.30; p= 0.026). Although data analysis by the X 2 test showed that family history had a significant effect on prostate cancer (X 2 = 14.43; p= 0.001), smoking did not show a significant effect on the incidence of this disorder (X 2 = 4.67; p= 0.097). The T2N1M0 stage is the most common form of prostate cancer in patients with family history of prostate cancer and the habit of smoking. Also, the expression of KRAS1P, GLB1L2, SChLAP1 and PACSIN3 oncogenes reduced in prostate cancer samples compared to the control group. Conclusions: Overall, functional interpretation of gene expression in the prostate tissue can affect tumor progression. Yet, further practical studies are required to reveal the accurate underlying mechanisms.