Effects of antibiotics on the abundance of antibiotic resistance determinants during and after antibiotic administration to beef cattle: A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies
Jones, M. L.; Sanchez-Tojar, A.; Bethel, A.; Leonard, A. F. C.; Lamb, E.; Casanova, N. A.; Dominguez, J.; Quiroga, M. P.; Centron, D.; Alonso, A. P.; Fernandez-Miyakawa, M.; Gaze, W.; Petroni, A.; Garside, R.
Show abstract
BackgroundBeef feedlots are increasing concerns that antibiotic use in beef cattle selects for antibiotic resistance, but limitations of primary studies and previous syntheses make it difficult to confirm a consistent effect. We conducted a rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis to summarise: 1) the effect during and after antibiotic administration; 2) its moderation by time since administration started/ended. MethodsEligible studies longitudinally compared beef cattle administered antibiotics to those that were not, measuring resistance determinants in faeces and/or environments. Information sources included Web of Science, CAB Abstracts, and Medline (last searches: 05/03/25). Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I. Meta-analysis was conducted where feasible, using individual participant data where necessary. ResultsThe 33 included studies were mostly small trials of North American feedlot cattle, all with high risks of bias. Meta-analysis of 11 studies of tylosin, ceftiofur, and chlortetracycline indicated positive effects on absolute abundance of resistance both during (SMDH = 0.4; 95% CI = 0.11 to 0.69, p = <0.01) and after (SMDH = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.71, p = <0.01) antibiotic administration. Log-transformed time was positively associated with effect size during (Slope = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.1 to 1.16, p = 0.02), and negatively associated after (Slope = -0.65; 95% CI = -1.24 to -0.06, p = 0.03) DiscussionAvailable evidence indicates time-dependent selection for antibiotic resistance in beef cattle, warranting further regulation to limit human health risks. Simultaneously, uncertainty about precise effect sizes warrants further research. FundingBBSRC Registrationhttps://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/RXQHT
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.