IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v28y2008i4p1115-1124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dose‐Response Models for Inhalation of Bacillus anthracis Spores: Interspecies Comparisons

Author

Listed:
  • Timothy A. Bartrand
  • Mark H. Weir
  • Charles N. Haas

Abstract

Because experiments with Bacillus anthracis are costly and dangerous, the scientific, public health, and engineering communities are served by thorough collation and analysis of experiments reported in the open literature. This study identifies available dose‐response data from the open literature for inhalation exposure to B. anthracis and, via dose‐response modeling, characterizes the response of nonhuman animal models to challenges. Two studies involving four data sets amenable to dose‐response modeling were found in the literature: two data sets of response of guinea pigs to intranasal dosing with the Vollum and ATCC‐6605 strains, one set of responses of rhesus monkeys to aerosol exposure to the Vollum strain, and one data set of guinea pig response to aerosol exposure to the Vollum strain. None of the data sets exhibited overdispersion and all but one were best fit by an exponential dose‐response model. The beta‐Poisson dose‐response model provided the best fit to the remaining data set. As indicated in prior studies, the response to aerosol challenges is a strong function of aerosol diameter. For guinea pigs, the LD50 increases with aerosol size for aerosols at and above 4.5 μm. For both rhesus monkeys and guinea pigs there is about a 15‐fold increase in LD50 when aerosol size is increased from 1 μm to 12 μm. Future experimental research and dose‐response modeling should be performed to quantify differences in responses of subpopulations to B. anthracis and to generate data allowing development of interspecies correction factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Timothy A. Bartrand & Mark H. Weir & Charles N. Haas, 2008. "Dose‐Response Models for Inhalation of Bacillus anthracis Spores: Interspecies Comparisons," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(4), pages 1115-1124, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:28:y:2008:i:4:p:1115-1124
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01067.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01067.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01067.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles N. Haas, 2002. "On the Risk of Mortality to Primates Exposed to Anthrax Spores," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 189-193, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Damon J A Toth & Adi V Gundlapalli & Wiley A Schell & Kenneth Bulmahn & Thomas E Walton & Christopher W Woods & Catherine Coghill & Frank Gallegos & Matthew H Samore & Frederick R Adler, 2013. "Quantitative Models of the Dose-Response and Time Course of Inhalational Anthrax in Humans," PLOS Pathogens, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Bradford W. Gutting & Andrey Rukhin & Ryan S. Mackie & David Marchette & Brandolyn Thran, 2015. "Evaluation of Inhaled Versus Deposited Dose Using the Exponential Dose‐Response Model for Inhalational Anthrax in Nonhuman Primate, Rabbit, and Guinea Pig," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(5), pages 811-827, May.
    3. Tao Hong & Patrick L. Gurian & Nicholas F. Dudley Ward, 2010. "Setting Risk‐Informed Environmental Standards for Bacillus Anthracis Spores," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(10), pages 1602-1622, October.
    4. Sarah C. Taft & Stephanie A. Hines, 2012. "Benchmark Dose Analysis for Bacillus anthracis Inhalation Exposures in the Nonhuman Primate," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1750-1768, October.
    5. Bradford W. Gutting & Andrey Rukhin & David Marchette & Ryan S. Mackie & Brandolyn Thran, 2016. "Dose‐Response Modeling for Inhalational Anthrax in Rabbits Following Single or Multiple Exposures," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(11), pages 2031-2038, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael A. Hamilton & Tao Hong & Elizabeth Casman & Patrick L. Gurian, 2015. "Risk‐Based Decision Making for Reoccupation of Contaminated Areas Following a Wide‐Area Anthrax Release," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1348-1363, July.
    2. John L. Cicmanec, 2002. "Letter to the Editor from Cicmanec," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(6), pages 1035-1036, December.
    3. Michael Greenberg & Charles Haas & Anthony Cox & Karen Lowrie & Katherine McComas & Warner North, 2012. "Ten Most Important Accomplishments in Risk Analysis, 1980–2010," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(5), pages 771-781, May.
    4. Tao Hong & Patrick L. Gurian & Nicholas F. Dudley Ward, 2010. "Setting Risk‐Informed Environmental Standards for Bacillus Anthracis Spores," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(10), pages 1602-1622, October.
    5. Bradford W. Gutting & Andrey Rukhin & Ryan S. Mackie & David Marchette & Brandolyn Thran, 2015. "Evaluation of Inhaled Versus Deposited Dose Using the Exponential Dose‐Response Model for Inhalational Anthrax in Nonhuman Primate, Rabbit, and Guinea Pig," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(5), pages 811-827, May.
    6. Damon J A Toth & Adi V Gundlapalli & Wiley A Schell & Kenneth Bulmahn & Thomas E Walton & Christopher W Woods & Catherine Coghill & Frank Gallegos & Matthew H Samore & Frederick R Adler, 2013. "Quantitative Models of the Dose-Response and Time Course of Inhalational Anthrax in Humans," PLOS Pathogens, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, August.
    7. Margaret E. Coleman & Harry M. Marks & Timothy A. Bartrand & Darrell W. Donahue & Stephanie A. Hines & Jason E. Comer & Sarah C. Taft, 2017. "Modeling Rabbit Responses to Single and Multiple Aerosol Exposures of Bacillus anthracis Spores," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(5), pages 943-957, May.
    8. Sarah C. Taft & Stephanie A. Hines, 2012. "Benchmark Dose Analysis for Bacillus anthracis Inhalation Exposures in the Nonhuman Primate," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1750-1768, October.
    9. Bradford W. Gutting & Andrey Rukhin & David Marchette & Ryan S. Mackie & Brandolyn Thran, 2016. "Dose‐Response Modeling for Inhalational Anthrax in Rabbits Following Single or Multiple Exposures," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(11), pages 2031-2038, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:28:y:2008:i:4:p:1115-1124. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.