Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment of Pharmaceutical Products

Reference

1. 1.↵
   1. Clontz L.

   Microbial Limit and Bioburden Tests: Validation Approaches and Global Requirements, 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL: 2009.

   Google Scholar
2. 2.↵
   1. Jimenez L.

   Microbial Diversity in Pharmaceutical Product Recalls and Environments. PDA J. Pharm. Sci. Technol. 2007, 61(5), 383–399.

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full TextGoogle Scholar
3. 3.↵
   1. Sutton S.,
   2. Jimenez L.

   A Review of Reported Recalls Involving Microbiological Control 2004-2011 with Emphasis on FDA Considerations of Objectionable Organisms. Am. Pharm. Rev. 2012, 15(1), 42–57.

   OpenUrlGoogle Scholar
4. 4.↵
   1. Oxborrow G. S.,
   2. Roark A. L.,
   3. Fields N. D.,
   4. Puleo J. R.

   Mathematical Estimation of the Level of Microbial Contamination on Spacecraft Surfaces by Volumetric Air Sampling. Appl. Microbiol. 1974, 27(4), 706–712.

   OpenUrlPubMedGoogle Scholar
5. 5.↵
   1. Cassells A.

   Pathogen and Microbial Contamination Management in Micropropagation;Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht; 1997.

   Google Scholar
6. 6.↵
   <71> Sterility Tests. United States Pharmacopeia, 32; The United States Pharmacopeial Convention; Rockville, MD, 2009; pp 80–86.

   Google Scholar
7. 7.↵
   <1111> Microbiological Examination Of Non-Sterile Products: Acceptance Criteria for Pharmaceutical Preparations and Substances for Pharmaceutical Use. United States Pharmacopeia 34/National Formulary 29; United States Pharmacopeial Convention, 2011; pp 630–631.

   Google Scholar
8. 8.↵
   1. Ouédraogo A.,
   2. Groso A.,
   3. Meyer T.

   Risk Analysis in Research Environment—Part I: Modeling Lab Criticity Index Using Improved Risk Priority Number. Safety Science 2011, 49(6), 778–784.

   OpenUrlGoogle Scholar
9. 9.↵
   1. Xiao N.,
   2. Huang H.,
   3. Li Y.,
   4. He L.,
   5. Jin T.

   Multiple Failure Modes Analysis and Weighted Risk Priority Number Evaluation in FMEA. Engineering Failure Analysis 2011, 18(4), 1162–1170.

   OpenUrlGoogle Scholar
10. 10.↵
    1. Hazlett L. D.,
    2. Rosen D. D.,
    3. Berk R. S.

    Age-Related Susceptibility to Pseudomonas aeruginosa Ocular Infections in Mice. Infection and Immunity 1978, 20(1), 25–29.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full TextGoogle Scholar
11. 11.↵
    Dose response assessment—QMRAwiki. http://qmrawiki.canr.msu.edu/index.php?title=Dose_response_assessment (accessed Jul 2, 2016).

    Google Scholar
12. 12.↵
    1. Sandle T.

    Pharmaceutical Microbiology: Essentials for Quality Assurance and Quality Control; Woodhead Publishing, Elsevier: Cambridge, 2015.

    Google Scholar
13. 13.↵
    1. Frost J.

    Understanding and Using Discrete Distributions | Minitab. http://blog.minitab.com/blog/adventures-in-statistics/understanding-and-using-discrete-distributions (accessed July 2, 2016).

    Google Scholar
14. 14.↵
    1. Knudsen L. F.

    Sample Size of Parenteral Solutions for Sterility Testing. J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. Am. Pharm. Assoc. 1949, 38(6), 332–337.

    OpenUrlGoogle Scholar
15. 15.↵
    1. Sutton S.

    The Sterility Tests. Rapid Sterility Testing; PDA/DHI Publishing: Bethesda, MD; 2011, pp 7–24.

    Google Scholar
16. 16.↵
    A2LA, G108—Guidelines for Estimating Uncertainty for Microbiological Counting Methods. https://www.a2la.org/guidance/mu_for_micro_labs.pdf (accessed July 2, 2016).

    Google Scholar
17. 17.↵
    1. Oliver J. D.

    The Viable but Non-Culturable State in Bacteria. J. Microbiol. 2005, 43(1), 93–100.

    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar
18. 18.↵
    Minitab reference manual; Minitab, Inc.: State College, PA, 1996.

    Google Scholar