Next Article in Journal
Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Clustering Taxa through Vocalizations in a Neotropical Passerine (Rough-Legged Tyrannulet, Phyllomyias burmeisteri)
Next Article in Special Issue
Antibiotic Resistance of Escherichia coli Isolated from Conventional, No Antibiotics, and Humane Family Owned Retail Broiler Chicken Meat
Previous Article in Journal
A Survey of Ticks Infesting Dogs and Cats in Ireland
Previous Article in Special Issue
Occurrence and Molecular Characteristics of Mcr-1-Positive Escherichia coli from Healthy Meat Ducks in Shandong Province of China
Review

Overview of Quantitative Methodologies to Understand Antimicrobial Resistance via Minimum Inhibitory Concentration

1
Department of Population Health and Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine, UC Davis, 1089 Veterinary Medicine Dr., VM3B, Davis, CA 95616, USA
2
Department of Population Health and Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine-Cooperative Extension, UC Davis, 1089 Veterinary Medicine Dr., VM3B, Davis, CA 95616, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2020, 10(8), 1405; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081405
Received: 5 July 2020 / Revised: 5 August 2020 / Accepted: 7 August 2020 / Published: 12 August 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Antimicrobial Resistance in Poultry Production)
An emerging threat to human and food animal health is the development of antimicrobial resistance in bacteria associated with food animals. One of the primary tools for assessing resistance levels and monitoring for changes in expressed resistance is the use of minimum inhibitory concentration tests, which expose bacterial isolates to a series of dilutions of an antimicrobial agent to identify the lowest concentration of the antimicrobial that effectively prevents bacterial growth. These tests produce a minimum inhibitory value that falls within a range of concentrations instead of an exact value, a process known as censoring. Analysis of censored data is complex and careful consideration of methods of analysis is necessary. The use of regression methods such as logistic regression that divide the data into two or three categories is relatively easy to implement but may not detect important changes in the distributions of data that occur within the categories. Models that do not simplify the data may be more complex but may detect potentially relevant changes missed when the data is categorized. As a result, the analysis of minimum inhibitory concentration data requires careful consideration to identify the appropriate model for the purpose of the study.
The development of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) represents a significant threat to humans and food animals. The use of antimicrobials in human and veterinary medicine may select for resistant bacteria, resulting in increased levels of AMR in these populations. As the threat presented by AMR increases, it becomes critically important to find methods for effectively interpreting minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) tests. Currently, a wide array of techniques for analyzing these data can be found in the literature, but few guidelines for choosing among them exist. Here, we examine several quantitative techniques for analyzing the results of MIC tests and discuss and summarize various ways to model MIC data. The goal of this review is to propose important considerations for appropriate model selection given the purpose and context of the study. Approaches reviewed include mixture models, logistic regression, cumulative logistic regression, and accelerated failure time–frailty models. Important considerations in model selection include the objective of the study (e.g., modeling MIC creep vs. clinical resistance), degree of censoring in the data (e.g., heavily left/right censored vs. primarily interval censored), and consistency of testing parameters (e.g., same range of concentrations tested for a given antibiotic). View Full-Text
Keywords: MIC; AMR; mixed effect models; logistic regression; cumulative logistic regression; accelerated failure time-frailty models; mixture models MIC; AMR; mixed effect models; logistic regression; cumulative logistic regression; accelerated failure time-frailty models; mixture models
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Michael, A.; Kelman, T.; Pitesky, M. Overview of Quantitative Methodologies to Understand Antimicrobial Resistance via Minimum Inhibitory Concentration. Animals 2020, 10, 1405. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081405

AMA Style

Michael A, Kelman T, Pitesky M. Overview of Quantitative Methodologies to Understand Antimicrobial Resistance via Minimum Inhibitory Concentration. Animals. 2020; 10(8):1405. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081405

Chicago/Turabian Style

Michael, Alec, Todd Kelman, and Maurice Pitesky. 2020. "Overview of Quantitative Methodologies to Understand Antimicrobial Resistance via Minimum Inhibitory Concentration" Animals 10, no. 8: 1405. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081405

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop