A critical meta-analysis of predicted no effect concentrations for antimicrobial resistance selection in the environment
•Environmental risk assessment of antimicrobials is needed to reduce AMR selection.•Semi-systematic searches found selective concentrations, collated into a database.•PNECR interpretation facilitated through appraisal of approaches used.•Until further review, a PNECR of 0.01 µg/L for all antibiotics...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Water research (Oxford) 2024-11, Vol.266, p.122310, Article 122310 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 122310 |
container_title | Water research (Oxford) |
container_volume | 266 |
creator | Murray, Aimee K. Stanton, Isobel C. Tipper, Holly J. Wilkinson, Helen Schmidt, Wiebke Hart, Alwyn Singer, Andrew C. Gaze, William H. |
description | •Environmental risk assessment of antimicrobials is needed to reduce AMR selection.•Semi-systematic searches found selective concentrations, collated into a database.•PNECR interpretation facilitated through appraisal of approaches used.•Until further review, a PNECR of 0.01 µg/L for all antibiotics could be considered.•Future research directions are provided.
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the greatest threats to human health with a growing body of evidence demonstrating that selection for AMR can occur at environmental antimicrobial concentrations. Understanding the concentrations at which selection for resistance may occur is critical to help inform environmental risk assessments and highlight where mitigation strategies are required. A variety of experimental and data approaches have been used to determine these concentrations. However, there is minimal standardisation of existing approaches and no consensus on the relative merits of different methods. We conducted a semi-systematic literature review to collect and critically appraise available minimal selective concentration (MSC) and predicted no effect concentration for resistance (PNECR) data and the approaches used to derive them. There were 21 relevant articles providing 331 selective concentrations, ranging from 0.00087 µg/L (ciprofloxacin) to 2000 µg/L (carbenicillin). Meta-analyses of these data found that selective concentrations are highly compound-dependent, and only a subset of all antimicrobials have been the focus of most of the research. The variety of approaches that have been used, knowledge gaps and future research priorities were identified, as well as recommendations for those considering the selective risks of antimicrobials in the environment.
[Display omitted] |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.watres.2024.122310 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3099855406</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0043135424012090</els_id><sourcerecordid>3099855406</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c241t-2dc1d6a9f510ad8bb55e7d15ab716be450737a398136edcaa64e16533c58b7c83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtuFDEQRS1ERIaEP0DISzY92G27HxukKOIlRWJD1la1XS1q1G0Ptichfx9HnbBkVZtzb1Udxt5LsZdCdp8O-3soCfO-Fa3ey7ZVUrxiOzn0Y9NqPbxmOyG0aqQy-py9zfkghKjU-Iadq7GVfafVjv294i5RIQcLX7FAAwGWh0yZx5kfE3pyBT0PkeM8oyvcxeAwlASFYsh8jolDKLSSS3Gi2lJPolygUjzjUiOV4xR4-Y0cwx2lGNZacMnOZlgyvnueF-z265df19-bm5_fflxf3TSu1bI0rXfSdzDORgrwwzQZg72XBqZedhNqI3rVgxoHqTr0DqDTKDujlDPD1LtBXbCPW-8xxT8nzMWulB0uCwSMp2yVGMfBGC26iuoNra_knHC2x0QrpAcrhX1ybg92c26fnNvNeY19eN5wmlb0_0IvkivweQOw_nlHmGx2hFWQp1T9WB_p_xseAYBtlxc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3099855406</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A critical meta-analysis of predicted no effect concentrations for antimicrobial resistance selection in the environment</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Murray, Aimee K. ; Stanton, Isobel C. ; Tipper, Holly J. ; Wilkinson, Helen ; Schmidt, Wiebke ; Hart, Alwyn ; Singer, Andrew C. ; Gaze, William H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Murray, Aimee K. ; Stanton, Isobel C. ; Tipper, Holly J. ; Wilkinson, Helen ; Schmidt, Wiebke ; Hart, Alwyn ; Singer, Andrew C. ; Gaze, William H.</creatorcontrib><description>•Environmental risk assessment of antimicrobials is needed to reduce AMR selection.•Semi-systematic searches found selective concentrations, collated into a database.•PNECR interpretation facilitated through appraisal of approaches used.•Until further review, a PNECR of 0.01 µg/L for all antibiotics could be considered.•Future research directions are provided.
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the greatest threats to human health with a growing body of evidence demonstrating that selection for AMR can occur at environmental antimicrobial concentrations. Understanding the concentrations at which selection for resistance may occur is critical to help inform environmental risk assessments and highlight where mitigation strategies are required. A variety of experimental and data approaches have been used to determine these concentrations. However, there is minimal standardisation of existing approaches and no consensus on the relative merits of different methods. We conducted a semi-systematic literature review to collect and critically appraise available minimal selective concentration (MSC) and predicted no effect concentration for resistance (PNECR) data and the approaches used to derive them. There were 21 relevant articles providing 331 selective concentrations, ranging from 0.00087 µg/L (ciprofloxacin) to 2000 µg/L (carbenicillin). Meta-analyses of these data found that selective concentrations are highly compound-dependent, and only a subset of all antimicrobials have been the focus of most of the research. The variety of approaches that have been used, knowledge gaps and future research priorities were identified, as well as recommendations for those considering the selective risks of antimicrobials in the environment.
[Display omitted]</description><identifier>ISSN: 0043-1354</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1879-2448</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-2448</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2024.122310</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39217643</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology ; Anti-Infective Agents - pharmacology ; Antimicrobial resistance ; Drug Resistance, Bacterial ; Drug Resistance, Microbial ; Environment ; Humans ; Minimal selective concentration ; Predicted no effect concentration for resistance ; Risk assessment ; Selection</subject><ispartof>Water research (Oxford), 2024-11, Vol.266, p.122310, Article 122310</ispartof><rights>2024</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c241t-2dc1d6a9f510ad8bb55e7d15ab716be450737a398136edcaa64e16533c58b7c83</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1857-9204 ; 0000-0003-4705-6063 ; 0000-0002-2700-2407</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2024.122310$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39217643$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Murray, Aimee K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanton, Isobel C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tipper, Holly J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilkinson, Helen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmidt, Wiebke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hart, Alwyn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singer, Andrew C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaze, William H.</creatorcontrib><title>A critical meta-analysis of predicted no effect concentrations for antimicrobial resistance selection in the environment</title><title>Water research (Oxford)</title><addtitle>Water Res</addtitle><description>•Environmental risk assessment of antimicrobials is needed to reduce AMR selection.•Semi-systematic searches found selective concentrations, collated into a database.•PNECR interpretation facilitated through appraisal of approaches used.•Until further review, a PNECR of 0.01 µg/L for all antibiotics could be considered.•Future research directions are provided.
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the greatest threats to human health with a growing body of evidence demonstrating that selection for AMR can occur at environmental antimicrobial concentrations. Understanding the concentrations at which selection for resistance may occur is critical to help inform environmental risk assessments and highlight where mitigation strategies are required. A variety of experimental and data approaches have been used to determine these concentrations. However, there is minimal standardisation of existing approaches and no consensus on the relative merits of different methods. We conducted a semi-systematic literature review to collect and critically appraise available minimal selective concentration (MSC) and predicted no effect concentration for resistance (PNECR) data and the approaches used to derive them. There were 21 relevant articles providing 331 selective concentrations, ranging from 0.00087 µg/L (ciprofloxacin) to 2000 µg/L (carbenicillin). Meta-analyses of these data found that selective concentrations are highly compound-dependent, and only a subset of all antimicrobials have been the focus of most of the research. The variety of approaches that have been used, knowledge gaps and future research priorities were identified, as well as recommendations for those considering the selective risks of antimicrobials in the environment.
[Display omitted]</description><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</subject><subject>Anti-Infective Agents - pharmacology</subject><subject>Antimicrobial resistance</subject><subject>Drug Resistance, Bacterial</subject><subject>Drug Resistance, Microbial</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Minimal selective concentration</subject><subject>Predicted no effect concentration for resistance</subject><subject>Risk assessment</subject><subject>Selection</subject><issn>0043-1354</issn><issn>1879-2448</issn><issn>1879-2448</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMtuFDEQRS1ERIaEP0DISzY92G27HxukKOIlRWJD1la1XS1q1G0Ptichfx9HnbBkVZtzb1Udxt5LsZdCdp8O-3soCfO-Fa3ey7ZVUrxiOzn0Y9NqPbxmOyG0aqQy-py9zfkghKjU-Iadq7GVfafVjv294i5RIQcLX7FAAwGWh0yZx5kfE3pyBT0PkeM8oyvcxeAwlASFYsh8jolDKLSSS3Gi2lJPolygUjzjUiOV4xR4-Y0cwx2lGNZacMnOZlgyvnueF-z265df19-bm5_fflxf3TSu1bI0rXfSdzDORgrwwzQZg72XBqZedhNqI3rVgxoHqTr0DqDTKDujlDPD1LtBXbCPW-8xxT8nzMWulB0uCwSMp2yVGMfBGC26iuoNra_knHC2x0QrpAcrhX1ybg92c26fnNvNeY19eN5wmlb0_0IvkivweQOw_nlHmGx2hFWQp1T9WB_p_xseAYBtlxc</recordid><startdate>20241115</startdate><enddate>20241115</enddate><creator>Murray, Aimee K.</creator><creator>Stanton, Isobel C.</creator><creator>Tipper, Holly J.</creator><creator>Wilkinson, Helen</creator><creator>Schmidt, Wiebke</creator><creator>Hart, Alwyn</creator><creator>Singer, Andrew C.</creator><creator>Gaze, William H.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1857-9204</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4705-6063</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2700-2407</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241115</creationdate><title>A critical meta-analysis of predicted no effect concentrations for antimicrobial resistance selection in the environment</title><author>Murray, Aimee K. ; Stanton, Isobel C. ; Tipper, Holly J. ; Wilkinson, Helen ; Schmidt, Wiebke ; Hart, Alwyn ; Singer, Andrew C. ; Gaze, William H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c241t-2dc1d6a9f510ad8bb55e7d15ab716be450737a398136edcaa64e16533c58b7c83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</topic><topic>Anti-Infective Agents - pharmacology</topic><topic>Antimicrobial resistance</topic><topic>Drug Resistance, Bacterial</topic><topic>Drug Resistance, Microbial</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Minimal selective concentration</topic><topic>Predicted no effect concentration for resistance</topic><topic>Risk assessment</topic><topic>Selection</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Murray, Aimee K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanton, Isobel C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tipper, Holly J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilkinson, Helen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schmidt, Wiebke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hart, Alwyn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singer, Andrew C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaze, William H.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Water research (Oxford)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Murray, Aimee K.</au><au>Stanton, Isobel C.</au><au>Tipper, Holly J.</au><au>Wilkinson, Helen</au><au>Schmidt, Wiebke</au><au>Hart, Alwyn</au><au>Singer, Andrew C.</au><au>Gaze, William H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A critical meta-analysis of predicted no effect concentrations for antimicrobial resistance selection in the environment</atitle><jtitle>Water research (Oxford)</jtitle><addtitle>Water Res</addtitle><date>2024-11-15</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>266</volume><spage>122310</spage><pages>122310-</pages><artnum>122310</artnum><issn>0043-1354</issn><issn>1879-2448</issn><eissn>1879-2448</eissn><abstract>•Environmental risk assessment of antimicrobials is needed to reduce AMR selection.•Semi-systematic searches found selective concentrations, collated into a database.•PNECR interpretation facilitated through appraisal of approaches used.•Until further review, a PNECR of 0.01 µg/L for all antibiotics could be considered.•Future research directions are provided.
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the greatest threats to human health with a growing body of evidence demonstrating that selection for AMR can occur at environmental antimicrobial concentrations. Understanding the concentrations at which selection for resistance may occur is critical to help inform environmental risk assessments and highlight where mitigation strategies are required. A variety of experimental and data approaches have been used to determine these concentrations. However, there is minimal standardisation of existing approaches and no consensus on the relative merits of different methods. We conducted a semi-systematic literature review to collect and critically appraise available minimal selective concentration (MSC) and predicted no effect concentration for resistance (PNECR) data and the approaches used to derive them. There were 21 relevant articles providing 331 selective concentrations, ranging from 0.00087 µg/L (ciprofloxacin) to 2000 µg/L (carbenicillin). Meta-analyses of these data found that selective concentrations are highly compound-dependent, and only a subset of all antimicrobials have been the focus of most of the research. The variety of approaches that have been used, knowledge gaps and future research priorities were identified, as well as recommendations for those considering the selective risks of antimicrobials in the environment.
[Display omitted]</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>39217643</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.watres.2024.122310</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1857-9204</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4705-6063</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2700-2407</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0043-1354 |
ispartof | Water research (Oxford), 2024-11, Vol.266, p.122310, Article 122310 |
issn | 0043-1354 1879-2448 1879-2448 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3099855406 |
source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
subjects | Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology Anti-Infective Agents - pharmacology Antimicrobial resistance Drug Resistance, Bacterial Drug Resistance, Microbial Environment Humans Minimal selective concentration Predicted no effect concentration for resistance Risk assessment Selection |
title | A critical meta-analysis of predicted no effect concentrations for antimicrobial resistance selection in the environment |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T14%3A17%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20critical%20meta-analysis%20of%20predicted%20no%20effect%20concentrations%20for%20antimicrobial%20resistance%20selection%20in%20the%20environment&rft.jtitle=Water%20research%20(Oxford)&rft.au=Murray,%20Aimee%20K.&rft.date=2024-11-15&rft.volume=266&rft.spage=122310&rft.pages=122310-&rft.artnum=122310&rft.issn=0043-1354&rft.eissn=1879-2448&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.watres.2024.122310&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3099855406%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3099855406&rft_id=info:pmid/39217643&rft_els_id=S0043135424012090&rfr_iscdi=true |