Chapter 24 : Risk Assessment and Its Use in Approval, Licensing, and Prudent Use Guidelines

MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.

Preview this chapter:
Zoom in

Risk Assessment and Its Use in Approval, Licensing, and Prudent Use Guidelines, Page 1 of 2

| /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555817534/9781555813062_Chap24-1.gif /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555817534/9781555813062_Chap24-2.gif


The purpose of risk assessment is to help a manager better understand the risks (and opportunities) being faced and to evaluate the options available for their control. The chapter describes some antimicrobial resistance risk assessments that have been completed. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) wanted to produce a model that was based on reliable data. The FDA deemed that the risk assessment had quantitatively demonstrated that the resistance in question presented a risk to human health, and subsequently moved to withdraw use of the antimicrobial. The major strengths of the model were its mathematical simplicity, its reliance on mostly federally collected data, its very limited set of assumptions, and the ease with which it could be updated as new data became available. The data problems underlined the difficulties of evaluating even relatively simple model parameters for antimicrobial risk assessments. The FDA’s quantitative risk analysis model was successful in that it provided robust information from which the FDA was able to make an important decision. A key to the successful involvement of risk assessment in decision making is the neutrality of the risk assessor. There is, unfortunately, a growing trend in published antimicrobial resistance risk assessments that are clearly selective about their sources or manipulate a risk assessment model to produce the desired answer. The FDA guidance takes an essentially qualitative approach to evaluating drugs for approval and continued use.

Citation: Vose D. 2006. Risk Assessment and Its Use in Approval, Licensing, and Prudent Use Guidelines, p 415-424. In Aarestrup F (ed), Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacteria of Animal Origin. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555817534.ch24
Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Image of Figure 1
Figure 1

A schematic diagram of the FDA fluoroquinolone risk assessment.

Citation: Vose D. 2006. Risk Assessment and Its Use in Approval, Licensing, and Prudent Use Guidelines, p 415-424. In Aarestrup F (ed), Antimicrobial Resistance in Bacteria of Animal Origin. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555817534.ch24
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint


1. Bailar, J. C.,, and K. Travers. 2002. Review of assessments of the human health risk associated with the use of antimicrobial agents in agriculture. Clin. Infect. Dis. 34(Suppl. 3): S135 S143.
2. Bartholomew, M. J.,, K. Hollinger,, and D. Vose,. 2003. Characterizing the risk of antimicrobial use in food animals: fluoroquinolone resistant Campylobacter from consumption of chicken, p. 293 301. In M. E. Torrence, and R. E. Isaacson (ed.), Microbial Food Safety in Animal Agriculture, Iowa State University Press, Ames.
3. Barza, M.,, and K. Travers. 2002. Excess infections due to antimicrobial resistance: the “attributable fraction.” Clin. Infect. Dis. 34(Suppl. 3): S126 S130.
4. Black, R. E.,, M. M. Levine,, M. L. Clements,, T. P. Hughes,, and M. Blaser. 1988. Experimental Campylobacter jejuni infection in humans. J. Infect. Dis. 157: 472 479.
5. Bywater, R.,, and M. Casewell. 2000. An assessment of the impact of antibiotic resistance in different bacterial species and of the contribution of animal sources to resistance in human infections. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 46: 643 645. (Letter.)
6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1998. 1998 Annual Report, NARMS National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System: Enteric Bacteria. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga.
7. Codex Alimentarius Commission. 1999. Principles and guidelines for the conduct of microbiological risk assessment. Publication CAC/GL-30. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy.
8. Cox, L. A. 2002. Re-examining the causes of campylobacteriosis. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 6: 3S26 3S36.
9. Cox, L. A.,, and D. A. Popken. 2002. A simulation model of human health risks from chicken-borne Campylobacter jejuni. Technology 9: 55 84.
10. Emborg, H.-D.,, and O. E. Heuer (ed.). 2003. DANMAP 2002—Use of antimicrobial agents and occurrence of antimicrobial resistance in bacteria from food animals, foods and humans in Denmark. Danish Integrated Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring and Research Programme, Copenhagen, Denmark.
11. Food and Drug Administration. 2001. Risk assessment on the human health impact of fluoroquinolone resistant Campylobacter attributed to the consumption of chicken. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Veterinary Medicine ( revised January 2001). [Online.] http://www.fda.gov/cvm/ Risk_asses.htm.
12. Friedman, C.,, R. Hoekstra,, M. Samuel,, R. Marcus,, J. Bender,, B. Shiferaw,, S. Reddy,, S. D. Ahuja,, D. L. Helfrick,, F. Hardnett,, M. Carter,, B. Anderson,, and R. V. Tauxe. 2004. Risk factors for sporadic Campylobacter infection in the United States: a case-control study in FoodNet sites. J. Clin. Infect. Dis. 38(Suppl. 3): S285 S296.
13. Hald, T.,, D. Vose,, H. C. Wegener,, and T. Koupeev. 2004. A Bayesian approach to quantify the contribution of animalfood sources to human salmonellosis. Risk Anal. 24: 255 269.
13a. Harrison, P. F.,, and J. Lederberg (ed.). 1998. Antimicrobial Resistance: Issues and Options. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
14. Hayes, D. J.,, and H. H. Jensen. 2003. Lessons from the Danish ban on feed-grade antibiotics. www.choicesmagazine.org/2003-3/2003-3-01_print.htm, accessed 8 March 2005.
15. Heidelberg Appeal Netherlands Foundation. 2001. Emergence of a debate: AGPs and public health human health and antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs)—reassessing the risk. [Online.] http://www.ifahsec.org/International/publications/han.htm, accessed 8 March 2005.
16. Hurd, H. S.,, S. Doores,, D. Hayes,, A. Mathew,, J. Maurer,, P. Silley,, R. S. Singer,, and R. N. Jones. 2004. Public health consequences of macrolide use in food producing animals: a deterministic risk assessment. J. Food Prot. 67: 980 992.
17. Kelly, L.,, D. L. Smith,, E. L. Snary,, J. A. Johnson,, A. D. Harris,, M. Wooldridge,, and J. G. Morris, Jr. 2004. Animal growth promoters: to ban or not to ban? A risk assessment approach. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 24: 7 14.
18. Rosenquist, H.,, N. L. Nielsen,, H. M. Sommer,, B. Nørrung,, and B. B. Christensen. 2003. Quantitative risk assessment of human campylobacteriosis associated with thermophilic Campylobacter species in chickens. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 83: 87 103.
19. Smith, D. L.,, J. A. Johnson,, A. D. Harris,, J. P. Furuno,, E. N. Perencevich,, and J. G. Morris, Jr. 2003. Assessing risks for a pre-emergent pathogen: virginiamycin use and the emergence of streptogramin resistance in Enterococcus faecium. Lancet Infect. Dis. 3: 241 249.
20. Snary, E. L.,, L. A. Kelly,, H. C. Davison,, C. J. Teale,, and M. Wooldridge. 2004. Antimicrobial resistance: a microbial risk assessment perspective. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 53: 906 917.
21. Society for Risk Analysis. 2001. The Society for Risk Analysis. SRA Risk Newsl. 21(3).
22. Vose, D.,, J. Acar,, F. Anthony,, A. Franklin,, R. Gupta,, T. Nicholls,, Y. Tamura,, S. Thompson,, E. J. Threlfall,, M. van Vuuren,, D. G. White,, H. Wegener,, and L. Costarrica. 2001. Antimicrobial resistance: risk analysis methodology for the potential impact on public health of antimicrobial resistant bacteria of animal origin. Rev. Sci. Off. Int. Epizoot. 20: 811 827.
23. World Health Organization. 2005. WHO global principles for the containment of antimicrobial resistance in animals intended for food. [Online.] http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs268/en/.

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error