IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v32y2012i10p1750-1768.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benchmark Dose Analysis for Bacillus anthracis Inhalation Exposures in the Nonhuman Primate

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah C. Taft
  • Stephanie A. Hines

Abstract

There is considerable variability in the published lethality values for inhalation exposures of Bacillus anthracis. The lack of consensus on an acceptable dose‐response relationship poses a significant challenge in the development of risk‐based management approaches for use following a terrorist release of B. anthracis spores. This article reviewed available B. anthracis dose‐response modeling and literature for the nonhuman primate, evaluated the use of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Benchmark Dose Software (BMDS) to fit mathematical dose‐response models to these data, and reported results of the benchmark dose analysis of suitable data sets. The BMDS was found to be a useful tool to evaluate dose‐response relationships in microbial data, including that from B. anthracis exposure. An evaluation of the sources of variability identified in the published lethality data and the corresponding BMDS‐derived lethality values found that varying levels of physical characterization of the spore product, differing receptor‐specific exposure assumptions, choice of dose metrics, and the selected statistical methods all contributed to differences in lethality estimates. Recognition of these contributors to variability could ultimately facilitate agreement on a B. anthracis dose‐response relationship through provision of a common description of necessary study considerations for acceptable dose‐response data sets.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:10:p:1750-1768
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01808.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01808.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01808.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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Josep M Pujol & Joseph E Eisenberg & Charles N Haas & James S Koopman, 2009. "The Effect of Ongoing Exposure Dynamics in Dose Response Relationships," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(6), pages 1-12, June.
    4. T. W. Armstrong & C. N. Haas, 2007. "A Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment Model for Legionnaires' Disease: Animal Model Selection and Dose‐Response Modeling," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(6), pages 1581-1596, December.
    5. Hojin Moon & Hyun‐Joo Kim & James J. Chen & Ralph L. Kodell, 2005. "Model Averaging Using the Kullback Information Criterion in Estimating Effective Doses for Microbial Infection and Illness," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 1147-1159, October.
    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. 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.
    2. Signe M. Jensen & Felix M. Kluxen & Christian Ritz, 2019. "A Review of Recent Advances in Benchmark Dose Methodology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(10), pages 2295-2315, October.
    3. Signe M. Jensen & Christian Ritz, 2015. "Simultaneous Inference for Model Averaging of Derived Parameters," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(1), pages 68-76, January.
    4. 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. 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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Toru Watanabe & Timothy A. Bartrand & Mark H. Weir & Tatsuo Omura & Charles N. Haas, 2010. "Development of a Dose‐Response Model for SARS Coronavirus," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(7), pages 1129-1138, July.
    6. Agung Kusumawardhana & Ljiljana Zlatanovic & Arne Bosch & Jan Peter van der Hoek, 2021. "Microbiological Health Risk Assessment of Water Conservation Strategies: A Case Study in Amsterdam," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-17, March.
    7. 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.
    8. John L. Cicmanec, 2002. "Letter to the Editor from Cicmanec," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(6), pages 1035-1036, December.
    9. Walter W. Piegorsch, 2010. "Translational benchmark risk analysis," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(5), pages 653-667, July.
    10. Gin Nam Sze‐To & Christopher Y. H. Chao, 2011. "Use of Risk Assessment and Likelihood Estimation to Analyze Spatial Distribution Pattern of Respiratory Infection Cases," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(3), pages 351-369, March.
    11. Walter W. Piegorsch & Hui Xiong & Rabi N. Bhattacharya & Lizhen Lin, 2014. "Benchmark Dose Analysis via Nonparametric Regression Modeling," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(1), pages 135-151, January.
    12. Bidya Prasad & Kerry A. Hamilton & Charles N. Haas, 2017. "Incorporating Time‐Dose‐Response into Legionella Outbreak Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 291-304, February.
    13. 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.
    14. Steven B. Kim & Ralph L. Kodell & Hojin Moon, 2014. "A Diversity Index for Model Space Selection in the Estimation of Benchmark and Infectious Doses via Model Averaging," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(3), pages 453-464, March.
    15. Signe M. Jensen & Felix M. Kluxen & Christian Ritz, 2019. "A Review of Recent Advances in Benchmark Dose Methodology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(10), pages 2295-2315, October.
    16. 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.
    17. Kimberly M. Thompson & Mark A. Pallansch & Radboud J. Duintjer Tebbens & Steve G. Wassilak & Stephen L. Cochi, 2013. "Modeling Population Immunity to Support Efforts to End the Transmission of Live Polioviruses," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(4), pages 647-663, April.
    18. Steven B. Kim & Scott M. Bartell & Daniel L. Gillen, 2015. "Estimation of a Benchmark Dose in the Presence or Absence of Hormesis Using Posterior Averaging," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(3), pages 396-408, March.
    19. Enrique López Droguett & Ali Mosleh, 2014. "Bayesian Treatment of Model Uncertainty for Partially Applicable Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 252-270, February.
    20. Richard Bentham & Harriet Whiley, 2018. "Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment and Opportunist Waterborne Infections–Are There Too Many Gaps to Fill?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-11, June.

    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:32:y:2012:i:10:p:1750-1768. 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.