Information de reference pour ce titreAccession Number: | 00013257-201611000-00013.
|
Author: | Stewart, S. E.; Parker, M. D.; Amezquita, A.; Pitt, T. L.
|
Institution: | (1)Safety and Environmental Assurance Centre, Unilever, Colworth Science Park, Sharnbrook, Bedfordshire, MK44 1LQ, UK (2)712 Kenton Lane, Harrow, Middlesex, HA3 6AB, UK
|
Title: | |
Source: | International Journal of Cosmetic Science. 38(6):634-645, November 2016.
|
Abstract: | : Regulatory decisions regarding microbiological safety of cosmetics and personal care products are primarily hazard-based, where the presence of a potential pathogen determines decision-making. This contrasts with the Food industry where it is a commonplace to use a risk-based approach for ensuring microbiological safety. A risk-based approach allows consideration of the degree of exposure to assess unacceptable health risks. As there can be a number of advantages in using a risk-based approach to safety, this study explores the Codex Alimentarius (Codex) four-step Microbiological Risk Assessment (MRA) framework frequently used in the Food industry and examines how it can be applied to the safety assessment of personal care products.
The hazard identification and hazard characterization steps (one and two) of the Codex MRA framework consider the main microorganisms of concern. These are addressed by reviewing the current industry guidelines for objectionable organisms and analysing reports of contaminated products notified by government agencies over a recent 5-year period, together with examples of reported outbreaks. Data related to estimation of exposure (step three) are discussed, and examples of possible calculations and references are included. The fourth step, performed by the risk assessor (risk characterization), is specific to each assessment and brings together the information from the first three steps to assess the risk.
Although there are very few documented uses of the MRA approach for personal care products, this study illustrates that it is a practicable and sound approach for producing products that are safe by design. It can be helpful in the context of designing products and processes going to market and with setting of microbiological specifications. Additionally, it can be applied reactively to facilitate decision-making when contaminated products are released on to the marketplace. Currently, the knowledge available may only allow a qualitative or semi-quantitative rather than fully quantitative risk assessment, but an added benefit is that the disciplined structuring of available knowledge enables clear identification of gaps to target resources and if appropriate, instigate data generation.
(C) 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
|
Author Keywords: | microbiology; predictive microbiology; preservation systems; risk-based approach; safety testing.
|
References: | 1. CTFA (Cosmetics, Toiletry, and Fragrance Association). Microbiological Guidelines - Section 12: establishing microbial quality of cosmetic products. (2007).
2. ISO (International Organization for Standardization). International Standard ISO 29621. Cosmetics-Microbiology-Guidelines for the risk assessment and identification of microbiologically low-risk products. (2010).
3. Pitt, T.L., McClure, J., Parker, M.D., Amezquita, A. and McClure, P.J. Bacillus cereus in personal care products: risk to consumers. Int. J. Cosmet. Sci. 37, 165-174(2015).
4. US FDA (Food and Drug Administration). Guide to inspections of cosmetic product manufacturers. (1995;). Available at: http://www.gmp-compliance.org/ec...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 30 Sep 2015.
5. Siegert, W. Microbiological Quality Management for the production of cosmetics and detergents. SOFW-J. 138, 1-9(2012).
6. Geis, P.A. and Krowka, J.F. The microbiology of personal care and cosmetic products. SIMB News 63, 197-201(2013).
7. Curry, J.C., Brannan, D.K. and Geis, P.A. History of cosmetic microbiology. In: Cosmetic Microbiology: A Practical Approach (Geis, P.A., ed.), pp. 3-18. Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, Florida, US (2006).
8. US FDA (Food and Drug Administration). Recalls & alerts. (2015;). Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/Com...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 30 Sep 2015.
9. RAPEX (Rapid Alert System for dangerous non-food products). Search notifications. (2015;). Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/sa...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 30 Sep 2015.
10. Sutton, S. Does international harmonization of the USP microbial limits test require re-validation of finished product tests? J. Validat. Technol. 15, 10-16(2009).
11. Sutton, S. What is an objectionable organism? Am. Pharm. Rev. 15, 1-7(2012).
12. Bell, C. and Kyriakides, A. Pathogenic Escherichia coli. In: Foodborne Pathogens: Hazards, Risk Analysis and Control (Blackburn, C.d.W.and McClure, P.J., eds.), pp. 587-626. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge, UK (2009).
13. HPA (Health Protection Agency). Guidelines for assessing the microbiological safety of ready-to-eat foods placed on the market. (2009;). Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/up...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 1 Oct 2015.
14. EC (European Commission). Commission regulation (EC) No. 1441/2007 of 5 December 2007 amending Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs. (2007;). Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriS...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 1 Oct 2015.
15. CAC (Codex Alimentarius Commission). Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbiological Risk Assessment. CAC/GL 30-1999. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization, Rome/Geneva. (2014;). Available at: http://www.codexalimentarius.org...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 10 Aug 2015.
16. Ross, T. and McMeekin, T.A. Risk assessment and pathogen management. In: Foodborne Pathogens: Hazards, Risk Analysis and Control (Blackburn, C.d.W.and McClure, P.J., eds.), pp. 114-147. Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge, UK (2009).
17. FAO/WHO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization). Risk assessment of Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat foods. Microbiological Risk Assessment Series No. 5. (2004;). Available at: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/pu...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 28 Sep 2015.
18. FAO/WHO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization). Risk assessment of Vibrio vulnificus in raw oysters. Microbiological Risk Assessment Series No. 8. (2005;). Available at: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/pu...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 30 Sep 2015.
19. PCPC (Personal Care Products Council). Cosmetic microbiological safety: Comments on the US FDA public meeting on cosmetic microbiological safety. (2012;). Available at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!doc...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 10 Aug 2015.
20. CE (Cosmetics Europe). Guidelines on microbial quality management, Colipa. (1997;). Available at: https://www.cosmeticseurope.eu/p...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 25 Sep 2015.
21. Baird, R.M. Bacteriological contamination of products used for skin care in babies. Int. J. Cosmet. Sci. 6, 85-90(1984).
22. USP (The United States Pharmacopeia Convention). <1111> Microbiological examination of nonsterile products: acceptance criteria for pharmaceutical preparations and substances for pharmaceutical use. 923-924. (2015).
23. Booth, C. Harmonized microbial limits testing validation strategies - Institute of Validation Technology Network. (2013;). Available at: http://www.ivtnetwork.com/articl...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 25 Sep 2015.
24. SCCS (Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety). The SCCS's notes of guidance for the testing of cosmetic ingredients and their safety evaluation, 8th revision. (2012;). Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/health/scien...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 12 Sep 2015.
25. US FDA (Food and Drug Administration). BAM: Microbiological methods for cosmetics - Chapter 23. (2001;). Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodScie...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 10 Oct 2015.
26. Campana, R., Scesa, C., Patrone, V., Vittoria, E. and Baffone, W. Microbiological study of cosmetic products during their use by consumers: health risk and efficacy of preservative systems. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 43, 301-306(2006).
27. Taub, S.J. Contaminated cosmetics as cause of eye infections. Eye, Ear, Nose Throat Monthly 52, 227-228(1973).
28. Wilson, L.A. and Ahearn, D.G. Pseudomonas-induced corneal ulcers associated with contaminated eye mascaras. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 84, 112-119(1977).
29. Birteksoz, T.A., Tuysuz, M. and Otuk, G. Investigation of preservative efficacy and microbiological content of some cosmetics found on the market. Pakistan J. Pharm. Sci. 26, 153-157(2013).
30. Wong, S., Street, D., Delgado, S.I. and Klontz, K.C. Recalls of foods and cosmetics due to microbial contamination reported to the US Food and Drug Administration. J. Food Prot. 63, 1113-1116(2000).
31. Lundov, M.D. and Zacharaie, C. Recalls of microbiologically contaminated cosmetics in EU from 2005 to May 2008. Int. J. Cosmet. Sci. 30, 471-474(2008).
32. Jimenez, L. and Smalls, S. Molecular detection of Burkholderia cepacia in toiletry, cosmetics and pharmaceutical raw materials and finished products. J. AOAC Int. 83, 963-966(2000).
33. Bakir, M.A., Kudo, T.K. and Benno, Y. Microbacterium hatanonis sp. nov., isolated as a contaminant of hairspray. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 8, 654-658(2008).
34. Garcia-San Miguel, L., Saez-Nieto, J., Medina, M., Lopez Hernandez, S., Sanchez-Romero, I., Ganga, B. and Asenio, A. Contamination of liquid soap for hospital use with Raoultella planticola. J. Hosp. Infect. 86, 219-220(2014).
35. US FDA (Food and Drug Administration). P&G Voluntarily Recalls Specific Lots of Vicks Sinex Nasal Spray in the United States, Germany and the United Kingdom. (2009;). Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recall...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 11 Feb 2015.
36. US FDA (Food and Drug Administration). Propharma, Inc. Recalls Major Twice-A-Day 12 Hour Nasal Spray - Nasal Decongestant. (2004;). Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recall...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 11 Feb 2015.
37. Alvarez -Lerma, F., Maull, E., Terradas, R. et al. Moisturizing body milk as a reservoir of Burkholderia cepacia: outbreak of nosocomial infection in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit. Crit. Care 12, R10(2008).
38. Madani, T.A., Alsaedi, S., James, L. et al. Serratia marcescens-contaminated baby shampoo causing an outbreak among newborns at King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. J. Hosp. Infect., 1, 6-19(2011).
39. Caetano, J.A., Alzete-Lima, M., Miranda, M.D.C., Serufo, J.C. and Lins-Ponte, P.R. Identification of bacterial contamination in liquid soap for hospital use. Revista de Escola de Enfermagem da USP 45, 148-155(2011).
40. Buffet-Bataillon, S., Rabier, V., Betremieux, P. et al. Outbreak of Serratia marcescens in a neonatal intensive care unit: contaminated unmedicated liquid soap and risk factors. J. Hosp. Infect. 72, 17-22(2009).
41. Kutty, P.K., Moody, B., Gullion, J.S. et al. Multistate outbreak of Burkholderia cenocepacia colonization and infection associated with the use of intrinsically contaminated alcohol-free mouthwash. Chest 132, 1825-1831(2007).
42. Leyden, J.J., Stewart, R. and Kligman, A.M. Experimental inoculation of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Pseudomonas cepacia on human skin. J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem. 31, 19-28(1980).
43. ILSI (International Life Sciences Institute). A conceptual framework to assess the risks of human disease following exposure to pathogens. Risk Anal. 16, 841-847(1996).
44. Haas, C.N., Rose, J.B. and Gerba, C.P. Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey, US (2014).
45. FAO/WHO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization). Hazard characterization for pathogens in food and water - guidelines. Microbiological Risk Assessment Series No. 3. (2003;). Available at: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/pu...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 10 Aug 2015.
46. FAO/WHO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization). Exposure assessment of microbiological hazards in food - guidelines. Microbiological Risk Assessment Series No. 7. (2008;). Available at: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/pu...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 10 Aug 2015.
47. FAO/WHO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization). Risk characterization of microbiological hazards in food - guidelines. Microbiological Risk Assessment Series No. 17. (2009;). Available at: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/pu...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 10 Aug 2015.
48. CAC (Codex Alimentarius Commission). Guidelines for Risk Analysis of Foodborne Antimicrobial Resistance. CAC/GL 77-2011. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization, Rome/Geneva. (2011;). Available at: http://www.codexalimentarius.org...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 28 Sep 2015.
49. US EPA and USDA/FSIS (Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Agriculture - Food Safety and Inspection Service). Microbial risk assessment guideline: pathogenic microorganisms with focus on food and water. (2012;). Available at: http://www2.epa.gov/osa/microbia...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 10 Aug 2015.
50. Rose, J.B. and Haas, C.N. A risk assessment framework for the evaluation of skin infections and the potential impact of antibacterial soap washing. Am. J. Infect. Control 27, S26-S33(1999).
51. Roser, D.J., Van Den Akker, B., Boase, S., Haas, C.N., Ashbolt, N.J. and Rice, S.A. Dose-response algorithms for water-borne Pseudomonas aeruginosa folliculitis. Epidemiol. Infect. 143, 1524-1537(2015).
52. Soumpasis, I., Knapp, L. and Pitt, T. A proof-of-concept model for the identification of the key events in the infection process with specific reference to Pseudomonas aeruginosa in corneal infections. Infect. Ecol. Epidemiol. 5, 28750(2015).
53. Callegan, M.C., Jett, B.D., Hancock, L.E. and Gilmore, M.S. Role of hemolysin BL in the pathogenesis of extraintestinal Bacillus cereus infections as assessed in an endophthalmitis model. Infect. Immun. 67, 3357-3366(1999).
54. Moreau, J.M., Conerly, L.L., Hume, E.B. et al. Effectiveness of mupirocin and polymyxin B in experimental Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Serratia marcescens keratitis. Cornea 21, 807-811(2002).
55. US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Exposure factors handbook: 2011 edition. EPA/600/R-090/052F. (2011;). Available at: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/r...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre, accessed 2 Oct 2015.
56. Gehan, E.A. and George, S.L. Estimation of human body surface area from height and weight. Cancer Chemother. Rep. 54, 225-235(1970).
57. Ferrario, V.F., Sforza, C., Schmitz, J.H., Ciusa, V. and Colombo, A. Normal growth and development of lips: a 3-dimensional study from 6 years to adulthood using a geometric model. J. Anat. 196, 415-423(2000).
58. Cowan-Ellsberry, C., McNamee, P.M. and Leazer, T. Axilla surface area for males and females: measured distribution. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 52, 46-52(2008).
59. Loretz, L.J., Api, A.M., Babcock, L. et al. Exposure data for cosmetic products: Facial cleanser, hair conditioner, and eye shadow. Food Chem. Toxicol. 46, 1516-1524(2008).
60. PDA (Parenteral Drug Association). Technical Report No. 67: exclusion of objectionable microorganisms from nonsterile pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and cosmetics. (2014).
61. Torbeck, L., Raccasi, D., Guilfoyle, D.E., Friedman, S.L. and Hussong, D. Burkholderia cepacia: the decision is overdue. PDA J. Pharm. Sci. Technol. 65, 535-543(2011).
62. Suller, M.T. and Russell, A.D. Triclosan and antibiotic resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 46, 11-18(2000).
63. Brannan, D.K. Biology of microbes. In: Cosmetic Microbiology: A Practical Approach (Geis, P.A., ed.), pp. 19-69. Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, Florida, US (2006).
64. Duffy, G. Emerging pathogenic Escherichia coli. In: Emerging Foodborne Pathogens (Motarjemi, Y.and Adams, M., eds.), pp. 253-281. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, UK (2006).
65. Laupland, K.B., Gregson, D.B., Church, D.L., Ross, T. and Pitout, J.D.D. Incidence, risk factors and outcomes of Escherichia coli bloodstream infections in a large Canadian region. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 14, 1041-1047(2008).
66. Mahenthiralingam, E., Baldwin, A., Drevenik, P., Vanlaere, E., Vandamme, P., LiPuma, J.J. and Dowson, C.G. Multilocus sequence typing breathes life into a microbial metagenome. PLoS ONE 1, e17(2006;). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000017.
67. Loutet, S.A. and Valvano, M.A. A decade of Burkholderia cepacia virulence determinant research. Infect. Immun. 78, 4088-4100(2010).
68. Jones, J., Crete, J. and Neumeier, R. A case report of pink breast milk. J. Obstet., Gynecol. Neonatal Nurs. 43, 625-630(2014).
69. Mahlen, S.D. Serratia infections: from military experiments to current practice. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 24, 755-791(2011).
70. Ferrarese, L., Paglia, R. and Ghirardini, A. Bacterial resistance in cosmetics industrial plant: connected problems and their solution. Ann. Microbiol. 53, 477-490(2003).
71. Broberg, C.A., Palacios, M. and Miller, V.L. Klebsiella: a long way to go towards understanding this enigmatic jet-setter. F1000Prime Reports 6. doi: 10.12703/P6-64 (2014).
72. Aung, T. and Chan, T.K. Nosocomial Klebsiella pneumoniae conjunctivitis resulting in infectious keratitis and bilateral corneal perforation. Cornea 17, 558-561(1998).
73. Callegan, M.C., Booth, M.C., Jett, B.D. and Gilmore, M.S. Pathogenesis of Gram-positive bacterial endophthalmitis. Infect. Immun. 67, 3348-3356(1999).
|
Language: | English.
|
Document Type: | Original Articles.
|
Journal Subset: | Clinical Medicine.
|
ISSN: | 0142-5463
|
NLM Journal Code: | 8007161
|
DOI Number: | https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ics.1...- ouverture dans une nouvelle fenêtre
|
Annotation(s) | |
|
|