Approval Date: August 6, 1990
Freedom of Information Summary
NADA 138-992
I. GENERAL INFORMATION:
NADA 138-992 Sponsor: The Upjohn Company
Agricultural DivisionGeneric Name: melengestrol acetate, lasalocid sodium, tylosin phosphate Trade Name: MGA® 100/200 Premix, MGA® 500 Liquid Premix, Bovatec®, Tylan® Marketing Status: Over the Counter (OTC) II. Indications for Use:
For increased rate of weight gain, improved feed efficiency, suppression of estrus (heat), and reduced incidence of liver abscesses in heifers fed in confinement for slaughter.
III. Dosage Form, Route of Administration and Recommended Dosage:
Dosage Form: Feed
Route of Administration: Oral
Recommended Dosage:
Approval has been granted to feed 0.25 to 0.5 mg melengestrol acetate (MGA) per head per day in combination with 10 to 30 g lasalocid per ton of air dried complete feed and 8 to 10 g tylosin per ton of air dried complete feed (to provide 90 mg/hd/day) when each additive is provided via separate supplements or a supplement containing melengestrol acetate is fed in combination with a complete feed containing lasalocid and tylosin.The supplement containing melengestrol acetate provided at a rate of 0.5 to 2.0 pounds per head may be top-dressed onto or mixed with the feed containing lasalocid and tylosin.
This clearance does not provide for the mixing of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid and tylosin premixes together in a common supplement or in a complete ration offered for sale by the feed manufacturer.
IV. Effectiveness: (In compliance with combination approval claims)
The efficacy of melengestrol acetate for increased rate of weight gain, improved feed efficiency and suppression of estrus (heat) in heifers fed in confinement for slaughter is well documented and approved (21CFR 558.342). Further, the effectiveness of lasalocid for improved feed efficiency and increased rate of weight gain of feedlot cattle is established and approved (21CFR 558.311) as is the effectiveness of tylosin for reduction of liver abscesses in the same class of cattle (21CFR 558.625). For these applications, the efficacy of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid and tylosin when co-administered was established by conducting a series of field trials under a common protocol. These trials were designed to evaluate the performance of feedlot heifers fed each drug separately and in combination.
A. Pivotal Study
A feedlot heifer study consisting of field trials at nine locations with three replications per location was conducted to generate animal performance data on the combination of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid and tylosin. Results of each study are reported as well as a summary and statistical analysis of the pooled data from all nine field investigations.
1. Type of Study
a. Clinical (field) trials
2. Investigator names and addresses by location:
Trial No. 540-9665-0-JFM-83-002
Steve Rust, Ph.D.
Montana Ag Experiment Station
Route 1, Box 131
Huntley, MT 59037Trial No. 540-9665-0-JFM-83-003
David Bechtol, D.V.M.
Palo Duro Agri. Division
Box 974
Canyon, TX 79015Trial No. 540-9665-0-JFM-83-004
Thomas R. Schriemer, B.S.
Unit 9690
The Upjohn Company
Kalamazoo, MI 49001Trial No. 540-9665-0-JFM-83-005
Steve Rust, Ph.D.
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717Trial No. 540-9665-0-JFM-83-006
Jack Riley, Ph.D.
Dept. of Animal Science - Industry
Weber Hall KSU
Manhattan, KS 66506Trial No. 540-9665-0-JFM-83-007
Richard Luther, Ph.D.
Animal and Range Science Dept.
Animal Science Complex Building
Brooklings, SD 57007Trial No. 540-9665-0-JFM-83-008
Jerry Martin, Ph.D.
Panhandle State University
Box 430
Goodwell, OK 73939-and-
Donald R. Gill, Ph.D.
005 Animal Science
Oklahoma State University
Stillwater, OK 74074Trial No. 540-9665-0-83-009*
Elvin Thomas, Ph.D.
Dept. of Animal & Dairy Sciences
Auburn University
Auburn, AL 36830Trial No. 540-9665-0-JFM-83-010
Wilton Heinemann, Ph.D.
Research & Extension Center
Washington State University
P.O. Box 30
Prosser, WA 99350Trial No. 540-9665-0-JFM-84-001
Steve Schmidt, Ph.D.
Dept. of Animal and Dairy Sciences
Auburn University
Auburn, AL 36830*This trial was canceled shortly after it was started for reasons unrelated to the safety and efficacy of the compounds. There were no data generated as a result of this trial.
3. General design of each field investigation
a. Purpose of the field investigation:
To evaluate the effect of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid sodium and tylosin phosphate on the performance of feedlot heifers when fed singly and in combination.
b. Test animals
(1) Species: Bovine
Number/group: The number of heifers per treatment group varied from location to location, and ranged from 6 to 14 animals per pen (Table 1).(2) Subgroup Identity: Heifers used in the field studies were non-pregnant yearlings and the breeds were typical of those commonly found in commercial feedlots. The average initial weights ranged from 674 to 826 pounds (Table 1).
c. Control groups
Groups of heifers fed melengestrol acetate, or lasalocid or tylosin alone, or lasalocid and tylosin in combination served as controls. Pairwise, comparisons were made to groups of heifers for the 3 drugs in combination.
d. Diagnosis: Not applicable.
e. Dosage form:
(1) Medicated feed: Feed was medicated using melengestrol acetate, lasalocid or tylosin premixes. Final feeds were prepared using intermediate premixes which were either mixed into or top-dressed onto the bulk of the ration.
f. Route of drug administration: (1) Oral
g. Dosages:
The dosages used in the field study were: melengestrol acetate, 0.5 mg/head/day; lasalocid, 30 gm/ton of air dried feed; tylosin, 10 gm/ton of air dried feed.
h. Days on test:
The cattle were fed for a minimum of 90 days, the actual day of trial termination being left up to the investigator's judgement as to when the cattle had reached market weight and condition. The days on test by location are listed on Table 1.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 5 columns.)
Table 1. General Trial Information Mean Estrus Location Starting Detection Trial No. Number/Pen Wt/lbs Days on Test (Yes/No) Montana (Huntley) (A) (540-9665-0-JFM-83-002 12 790 102 Yes Texas 540-9665-0-JFM-83-003 14 707 104 Yes Michigan 540-9665-0-JFM-83-004 8 735 97 No Montana (Bozeman) (B) 540-9665-0-JFM-83-005 8 826 97 Yes Kansas 540-9665-0-JFM-83-006 6 731 92 No South Dakota 540-9665-0-JFM-83-007 8 700 126 No Oklahoma 540-9665-0-JFM-83-008 8 674 112 Yes Washington 540-9665-0-JFM-93-010 8 773 96 Yes Alabama 540-9665-0-JFM-001 8 728 99 Noi. Measurements taken: The following were measured:
- Estrus: 2X per day (AM and PM) during days 5 through 47 of the trial. Estrus was measured at five of the nine locations (Table 1).
- Cattle weight: Cattle were weighed at about 28 day intervals.
- Feed consumption: Daily feed records were maintained.
- Daily observations: Individual pens of cattle were observed at least once per day for general activity and physical condition of the cattle.
- Liver Evaluation: Individual heifer livers were evaluated for liver abscesses at slaughter.
4. Results
Performance Data:
The treatment by location means for percent standing estrus, average daily gain, feed efficiency and percent abscessed livers are presented in the following tables. While the study included several treatment groups, data from only those pertinent to the subject approval are included.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 6 columns.)
Table 2. Treatment by Location Means for Percent Standing Estrus
Treatment Oklahoma Montana* Montana** Texas Washington melengestrol acetate/tylosin 8.33 16.67 16.67 26.19 8.33 melengestrolacetate
/lasalocid sodium8.33 16.67 11.11 11.90 16.67 lasalocid sodium/tylosin 45.83 36.31 61.11 19.05 37.50 melengestrolacetate/
lasalocid sodium/ tylosin4.17 16.67 8.33 7.14 8.33
* Bozeman, Montana
** Huntley, Montana
(Eds. note: The following 3 tables consists of 10 columns each.)Table 3. Treatment by Location Means for Average Daily Gain
Treatment Alabama Oklahoma Kansas Montana* Montana** S Dakota Texas Michigan Washington melengestrolacetate/tylosin 2.63 2.39 3.17 2.40 2.93 3.19 2.92 3.42 2.52 melengestrol acetate
/lasalocid sodium3.05 2.38 3.09 2.43 2.87 3.31 3.15 3.45 2.59 lasalocid sodium/tylosin 2.91 2.10 2.99 2.44 2.60 3.05 2.61 3.04 2.36 melengestrol acetate
/lasalocid sodium/tylosin3.03 2.28 3.21 2.61 3.00 3.32 2.89 3.42 2.78 * Bozeman, Montana
** Huntley, MontanaTable 4. Treatment by Location Means for Feed Efficiency Treatment Alabama Oklahoma Kansas Montana* Montana** S Dakota Texas Michigan Washington melengestrol 8.53 6.25 8.19 10.42 9.03 6.53 7.49 6.85 8.49 acetate/tylosin melengestrol 7.47 6.19 8.02 10.07 9.14 9.56 7.26 6.93 8.17 acetate/lasalocid sodium lasalocid sodium/tylosin 7.68 6.79 8.36 10.43 9.67 6.78 8.29 7.29 8.60 melengestrol 7.49 6.43 7.74 9.84 8.88 6.37 7.63 6.77 7.83 acetate/lasalocid sodium/tylosin * Bozeman, Montana ** Huntley, Montana
Table 5. Treatment by Location Means for Percent Abscessed Livers Treatment Alabama Oklahoma Kansas Montana* Montana** S Dakota Michigan Washington melengestrol 12.50 0.00 0.00 8.33 11.11 4.17 0.00 8.33 acetate/tylosin melengestrol 29.17 16.67 33.33 54.17 19.44 8.33 8.33 12.50 acetate/lasalocid sodium lasalocid sodium/tylosin 8.33 0.00 5.56 13.69 8.33 0.00 0.00 26.19 melengestrol 16.67 0.00 5.56 25.00 19.44 0.00 0.00 12.50 acetate/lasalocid sodium/tylosin * Bozeman, Montana ** Huntley, Montana
The results from the 9 individual field investigations were pooled and analyzed statistically to evaluate effectiveness. Average daily gain (ADG), feed efficiency (FE) (9 locations), and liver abscess data (8 locations) were pooled. Estrus suppression data were pooled from five of the nine locations.
The least squares treatment means pooled across all locations are presented in Table 6.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 5 columns.)
Table 6. Least Squares Treatment Means Pooled Across Location % Standing Feed Average % Abscessed Treatment Estrus* Efficiency Daily Gain Livers* melengestrol acetate/tylosin 23.89 7.97 2.84 16.19 melengestrol acetate/lasalocid 22.41 7.76 2.92 27.94 sodium lasalocid sodium/tylosin 39.66 8.21 2.68 17.39 melengestrol acetate/lasalocid 17.98 7.66 2.95 17.76 sodium/tylosin *Means are based on Freeman-Tukey transformation.5. Statistical analysis:A least squares analysis of variance for the transformed liver abscess (8 locations) and performance data from the nine location, and transformed estrus data from 5 locations was conducted. The results of this analysis are presented on Table 7.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 6 columns.)
Table 7. The significance levels for the comparisons required for the combinations were: ------------Parameter------------ Liver Combination Comparison Estrus FE ADG Abscess MGA + Lasalocid(L) + T MGA + L vs MGA + L + T .00021 MGA + T vs MGA + L + T .00531 .02985 L + T vs MGA + L + T .000012 .00001 .000005The melengestrol acetate + lasalocid + tylosin combination was justified since the contribution of lasalocid significantly enhanced feed efficiency (P=0.00531). In this combination, melengestrol acetate was effective for estrus suppression (P=0.000012), feed efficiency (P=0.00001), and average daily gain (P=0.000005). Tylosin was also effective in reducing the incidence of liver abscesses (P=0.00021) in this 3-way combination (Table 7).6. Conclusions
The data generated by the nine location field study demonstrated that the melengestrol acetate, lasalocid, tylosin combination is justified for its effect on estrus suppression, improved feed efficiency, increased rate of weight gain and reduction of liver abscesses. Each drug, melengestrol acetate, lasalocid and tylosin has been shown to make a significant contribution to the effectiveness of the combination.
7. Adverse Reactions
No adverse reactions due to the feeding of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid, or tylosin, either singly or in combination were reported.
8. Special Issues
Compliance with combination drug policy:
a. The effectiveness and safety of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid, and tylosin when fed singly to feedlot cattle are well documented in their respective approved NADAs. The results of effectiveness and safety studies were submitted to the FDA in support of these respective NADAs. Such data resulted in the approval of melengestrol acetate as per CFR 558.342, lasalocid as per CFR 558.311, and tylosin as per CFR 558.625. Data generated in support of combination usage have demonstrated that melengestrol acetate, lasalocid and tylosin fed together are effective and safe.
The data establish compliance with 21CFR 514.1(b)(8)(v) and CVM's combination drug guidelines (November 9, 1983). The combination is justified as detailed in items 4, 5 and 6 above.
The use of untreated controls was not deemed necessary as a test for general effectiveness because the individual drugs have been previously shown to be effective and already approved at the levels tested. The treatment groups consisting of the individual drugs and the two-way combinations served as the appropriate controls for the respective three-way combination. Thus, these treatment groups essentially served as negative controls with respect to 21CFR 514.111 (a)(5)(ii)(a)(4), and the studies were properly controlled.
To justify the combination, comparisons were made which demonstrated that each drug made a statistically significant contribution to the combination. The three-way combination provides a benefit that cannot be obtained from any of the possible two-way combinations.
A comparison of melengestrol acetate-lasalocid-tylosin vs. melengestrol acetate-lasalocid for transformed percent liver abscesses demonstrates the contribution of tylosin to the combination.
A comparison of melengestrol acetate-lasalocid-tylosin vs. lasalocid-tylosin for ADG, FE and estrus suppression demonstrates the contribution of melengestrol acetate to the combination. Significance for any variable shows that melengestrol acetate contributes to the combination.
A comparison of melengestrol acetate-lasalocid-tylosin vs. melengestrol acetate-tylosin for ADG and FE demonstrates the contribution of lasalocid to the combination. Significance for any variable shows that lasalocid contributes to the combination.
The proposed ranges for each drug are justified when fed in combination since the highest levels proposed were tested in combination for efficiency and human and animal safety.
B. Corroborative Studies: N/A
V. Animal Safety:
A. Pivotal study
The safety of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid and of tylosin in the bovine have been documented as evidenced by their respective approvals (21CFR 558.342 for melengestrol acetate, 21CFR 558.311 for lasalocid, and 21CFR 558.625 for tylosin) as feed additives. The following pivotal study was conducted to establish the target animal safety of these three additives when fed in combination.
1. A 90 day, subchronic study was conducted.
2. Investigator:
A.D. Hall, Ph.D., D.V.M.
The Upjohn Company
Kalamazoo, MI 490013. General Study design:
a. Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of the melengestrol acetate, lasalocid and tylosin when fed in combination in the diet of yearling heifers at 1 to 5 times the recommended dosage.
b. Test animals:
1) Species: Bovine
Number per Group: 14 control, 7 treated.2) Breed: Hereford
Age: Yearling
Sex: Female (heifers)
Weight: 284 to 378 kg initial weightc. Dosage form:
1) Drug premixes were incorporated in the feed through the use of intermediate premixes.
2) Formulations were typical of those used in commercial feedlot.
d. Dosage used:
1) Control: No drugs
2) 1X: 0.5 mg melengestrol acetate per head per day
30 g lasalocid sodium per ton of air dried feed
10 g tylosin phosphate per ton of air dried feed3) 3X: 1.5 mg melengestrol acetate per head per day
90 g lasalocid sodium per ton of air dried feed
30 g tylosin phosphate per ton of air dried feed4) 5X: 2.5 mg melengestrol acetate per head per day
150 g lasalocid sodium per ton of air dried feed
50 g tylosin phosphate per ton of air dried feede. Routes of administration: Oral
f. Test duration: 90 days
g. Parameters measured:
1) Clinical observations included twice daily health checks, daily observations, body weight, daily feed consumption.
2) Clinical pathology
The following hematology parameters were measured:
Total leukocyte count
Total erythrocyte count
Hemoglobin
Hematocrit
Mean corpuscular volume
Mean corpuscular hemoglobin
Mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration
PlateletsMicroscopic Examination: WBC differential
The following serum chemistry parameters were measured:
Aspartate aminotransferase
Alkaline phosphatase
Creatinine
Inorganic Phosphorus
Glucose
Blood Urea Nitrogen
Calcium
Cholesterol
Total Bilirubin
Total Protein
Albumin
Creatinine phosphokinase
Sodium
Potassium
Chloride
Sorbitol dehydrogenaseUrine specimens were collected via paracentesis from the urinary bladder at the time of necropsy. The following parameters were measured:
Specific gravity
Dipstick:pH
Protein
Glucose
Ketones
BileMicroscopic Examination: Formed elements
3) Gross and microscopic pathology
The following is a list of organs and tissues that were examined grossly and had a representative sample fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin for microscopic evaluation:
Brain Diaphragm Pituitary Rumen Thyroids Reticulum Adrenals Omasum Pancreas Abomasum Ovaries Duodenum Uterus Jejunum Mammary gland Ileum Mediastinal lymph node Cecum Mesenteric lymph node Colon Lung Heart (one section from each atrium and ventricle) Liver Gall bladder Kidneys Aorta (and small arteries) Urinary bladder Bone Spleen Bone Marrow (smear)* Gross lesions*Bone marrow smears were made at the time of necropsy, air dried and fixed for 30 seconds or more in methanol. Slides were stained with Wrights stain.The following organs were weighed at necropsy, paired organs weighed together:
Adrenals, liver, kidneys and heart.
4) Results
a. Clinical Observations
No adverse, drug-related clinical signs were observed during this study. Although there were no significant differences in average daily gain (ADG) between treated and control animals at mid-study and at termination, there was a trend toward decreased ADG at the 3X and 5X levels of treatment.
b. Clinical pathology
Occasional statistically significant changes in several hematologic and serum chemistry parameters were detected, but all values were well within normal acceptable ranges and no dose-related trends were seen.
c. Gross and microscopic pathology
Several gross and histologic tissue changes were observed, but due to the relative even distribution of the changes in all dose groups including controls, these findings were considered to be incidental rather than drug- related.
5) Conclusions
Based upon the results of this study, the combination of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid and tylosin phosphate in the daily feed of yearling heifers appears to be non-toxic when fed for 90 days at up to 5 times the recommended dose.
VI. Human Safety:
A. Drugs for use in food animals
1. Toxicity tests
Data regarding toxicity testing in melengestrol acetate, lasalocid sodium and tylosin phosphate are contained in the approved NADAs for the three above mentioned compounds.
2. Safe concentration of residues
Tolerances for melengestrol acetate, lasalocid sodium and tylosin phosphate are published in the Code of Federal Regulations. Melengestrol acetate is currently approved under 21CFR 558.342 for use in heifers at 0.25 to 0.50 mg/head/day with a 48 hour withdrawal period. No residues of melengestrol acetate may be found in uncooked edible tissues of cattle with a method sensitive to 25 ppb (21CFR 556.380). The tolerance for lasalocid in edible tissue of cattle under 21CFR 556.347 is 0.7 ppm with no withdrawal period established for cattle under 21CFR 558.311. The tolerance for tylosin phosphate has been established at 0.2 ppm (negligible residue) in uncooked fat, muscle, liver and kidney (CFR 556.740). Tylosin phosphate has no withdrawal period established under 21CFR 558.625.
3. Residue depletion and metabolism studies
Numerous studies have been conducted relative to the metabolism and depletion of residues of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid, and tylosin when administered individually to cattle. The results of those studies have been filed under the following submissions:
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 3 columns.)
Melengestrol Acetate Lasalocid Tylosin NADA 034-254 NADA 096-298 NADA 12-491 NADA 039-402 NADA 104-646 NADA 124-3094. Residue depletion noninterference studyThe following study was conducted to support the use of the three-way combination of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid sodium and tylosin phosphate in heifers:
Location: Michigan
Sponsor: The Upjohn Company
Investigators:
L.F. Krzeminski, Ph.D.
The Upjohn CompanyP. R. Handy, Ph.D.
Lilly Research Laboratories
Greenfield, IN 46140G. Chen, Ph.D.
Animal Science Research
Hoffman-LaRoche
Nutley, NJ 07110Groups of feedlot heifers were fed for 90 days with the drug combinations and treatment levels described below.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 4 columns.)
Number of Treatment Group Animals Level Treatment* 1 14 0 Control 2 7 1X 0.5 mg MGA + 30 g lasalocid + 10 g tylosin 3 7 3X 1.5 mg MGA + 90 g lasalocid + 30 g tylosin 4 7 5X 2.5 mg MGA + 150 g lasalocid + 50 g tylosin * Melengestrol acetate treatment expressed as mg/head/day, lasalocid and tylosin expressed as gram/ton air dried ration.The animals in each group were slaughtered within 16 hours following their last feeding. Perirenal fat was collected from all four treatment groups for the melengestrol acetate analysis, and liver samples were collected from the group 1 and 2 animals for the assay of lasalocid and tylosin.a. Residues of melengestrol acetate
The samples of pererenal fat from each animals were assayed for residues of melengestrol acetate using the official AOAC gas chromatographic method. Analysis of the samples from the group 2 (1X) animals showed that all fat samples were below the 25 ppb tolerance for MGA and five of the seven samples were below the 10 ppb limit of reliable measurement of the assay. The two fat samples that gave positive responses had MGA levels of 12.7 and 13.7 ppb.
Fat samples from groups 3 and 4 (the heifers dosed at 3X and 5X levels) yielded average residue levels of 37.6 and 49.4 ppm, respectively.
b. Residues of lasalocid
Liver tissue that was collected from the seven control animals and the seven heifers fed the group 2 (1X) ration were assayed for lasalocid by the HPLC -fluoresence regulatory method for the drug. An average residue value of 0.09 ppm (SD. 0.11 ppm) was obtained for the group 2 heifers, and that level is well below the 0.7 ppm tolerance for lasalocid in the livers from the control animals.
c. Residues of tylosin
The liver tissue samples from the group 2 (1X) heifers and 7 of the control animals were assayed for tylosin by the official assay which measures microbiologically the active drug. No positive responses were obtained for any of the samples by this method which has a limit of quantitation of 0.1 ppm.
5. Assay noninterference data
a. Melengestrol acetate assay
Data were generated using spiked control fat tissue samples to demonstrate that the presence of residues of lasalocid and tylosin does not interfere with the assay for MGA. The study was also intended to show that MGA is stable in frozen fat tissue over a period of 60 days.
Samples of freshly ground control bovine fat tissue were spiked with MGA, lasalocid and tylosin at the following levels:
MGA: 0.025
Lasalocid sodium: 7.0 ppm
Tylosin phosphate: 1.0 ppmThe spiked samples were assayed in duplicate for MGA by the official AOAC method after 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60 days of storage at -20°C. The average recoveries are shown below.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 8 columns.)
--------Day of Assay--------- 0 15 30 45 60 Ave. S.D. ppb found: 24.1 20.8 24.5 25.3 24.4 23.8 Percent Recovery 96 83 98 101 98 95 7.0b. Lasalocid assayData demonstrating the noninterference of residues of melengestrol acetate on the HPLC-fluorescence detection assay for lasalocid were generated by Hoffmann-LaRoche to support the original NADA approval for lasalocid in cattle (NADA 96-298). Those data have also been published as a journal article (J. Agricultural and Food Chemistry , 31, 75-78 (1983)) and are summarized below.
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 2 columns.)
Recovery Values Obtained for Lasalocid from Spiked Control Liver Samples Drug Combination and Fortification Level Lasalocid Recovery Lasalocid (0.1 ppm) 86% (mean of 6 assays) Lasalocid (0.1 ppm) + tylosin (0.40 ppm) 85.0% Lasalocid (0.1 ppm) + MGA (0.11 ppm) 80.1%
c. Tylosin assayData to demonstrate that the presence of lasalocid and MGA does not interfere wit the assay of tylosin are contained in study S-AAC-84-03 conducted by the Elanco Products Company. Samples of liver from control heifers were composited and fortified with 0.2 ppm lasalocid, 0.2 ppm tylosin and 0.2 ppm MGA. The samples were assayed for tylosin by the cylinder plate microbiological method using Micrococcus luteus as the test organism. No interference was detected by the presence of lasalocid and MGA.
The stability of tylosin in frozen liver tissue was demonstrated in study MRC8910 conducted by the Elanco Products Company. Liver tissue from control animals was fortified with 0.2 ppm tylosin and then frozen. Portions of the samples were thawed at intervals up to 56 days and assayed for tylosin. The stability of tylosin through 56 days was indicated by the recoveries in the following table:
(Eds. note: The following table consists of 3 columns.)
Tylosin Storage Stability in Frozen Liver Storage Mean Tylosin Percent (days) Recovery (ppm) Theorectical 0 0.166 83% 14 0.239 114% 28 0.172 86% 56 0.162 81%Regression analysis of these data demonstrates satisfactory tylosin stability for the period the tissues in the residue depletion study were stored before assay.The residue depletion and assay noninterference studies presented above demonstrate that the combined feeding of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid sodium, and tylosin phosphate at their highest approved levels results in tissue residues below the tolerance levels for each of the three drugs at 16 hours of withdrawal. The data also show that each drug in the three-way combination does not interfere with the assays for the others. This work confirms the adequacy of the 48 hour withdrawal time required for the presence of MGA in the combination and demonstrates that the use of these feed additives in combination does not pose a hazard to public health.
6. Regulatory methods
Practical analytical methods of analysis for tissue residues of melengestrol acetate, lasalocid sodium and tylosin phosphate may be found in the Food Additives Analytical Manual on display in FDA's Freedom of Information Public Room (Room 12-A-30), 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857.
VII. Agency Conclusions:
These NADA's provide for the combination use of MGA, lasalocid sodium, and tylosin phosphate at the levels of 0.25 to 0.5 mg/head/day, 10 to 30 g/ton of feed, and 8 to 10 g/ton of feed (to supply 90 mg/head/day), respectively; for increased rate of weight gain, improved feed efficiency, suppression of estrus (heat), and reduced incidence of liver abscesses in heifers fed in confinement for slaughter. Adequate data were submitted which show that the MGA, lasalocid, tylosin combination is justified for its effect on estrus suppression, improved feed efficiency, increased rate of weight gain and reduction of liver abscesses. Each drug; MGA, lasalocid, and tylosin has been shown to make a significant (P<0.05) contribution to the effectiveness of the combination. The combination, when fed at up to 5X the highest recommended combination approval (0.5 mg MGA/head/day plus 30 g lasalocid/ton, and 10 g tylosin phosphate/ton for 90 days), did not produce an adverse effect. No changes were made in the approved levels of the compounds or in the target animal and the noninterference of tylosin phosphate, lasalocid sodium and MGA with the analytical methods for MGA, lasalocid sodium and tylosin phosphate, respectively, was demonstrated. Accordingly, approval of these NADA's is not expected to increase human exposure to drug resides, and therefore did not require a complete re-evaluation of the human safety data in the original applications. For the purposes of human food safety review, these original NADA's have been treated as Category II supplements under the Agency's Supplemental Policy (42 FR 64367). These production drugs are OTC because they do not raise any special safety concerns.
VIII. Labeling
1. Type A Medicated Feed package label and mixing instructions
2. Type B Medicated Feed package label and mixing instructions
3. Type C Medicated Feed package label and mixing instructionsCopies of these labels may be obtained by writing to the:
Freedom of Information Office
Center for Veterinary Medicine, FDA
7500 Standish Place
Rockville, MD 20855