Literature DB >> 25818068

A decision-making framework for the grouping and testing of nanomaterials (DF4nanoGrouping).

Josje H E Arts1, Mackenzie Hadi2, Muhammad-Adeel Irfan3, Athena M Keene4, Reinhard Kreiling5, Delina Lyon6, Monika Maier7, Karin Michel8, Thomas Petry9, Ursula G Sauer10, David Warheit11, Karin Wiench3, Wendel Wohlleben3, Robert Landsiedel12.   

Abstract

The European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) 'Nano Task Force' proposes a Decision-making framework for the grouping and testing of nanomaterials (DF4nanoGrouping) that consists of 3 tiers to assign nanomaterials to 4 main groups, to perform sub-grouping within the main groups and to determine and refine specific information needs. The DF4nanoGrouping covers all relevant aspects of a nanomaterial's life cycle and biological pathways, i.e. intrinsic material and system-dependent properties, biopersistence, uptake and biodistribution, cellular and apical toxic effects. Use (including manufacture), release and route of exposure are applied as 'qualifiers' within the DF4nanoGrouping to determine if, e.g. nanomaterials cannot be released from a product matrix, which may justify the waiving of testing. The four main groups encompass (1) soluble nanomaterials, (2) biopersistent high aspect ratio nanomaterials, (3) passive nanomaterials, and (4) active nanomaterials. The DF4nanoGrouping aims to group nanomaterials by their specific mode-of-action that results in an apical toxic effect. This is eventually directed by a nanomaterial's intrinsic properties. However, since the exact correlation of intrinsic material properties and apical toxic effect is not yet established, the DF4nanoGrouping uses the 'functionality' of nanomaterials for grouping rather than relying on intrinsic material properties alone. Such functionalities include system-dependent material properties (such as dissolution rate in biologically relevant media), bio-physical interactions, in vitro effects and release and exposure. The DF4nanoGrouping is a hazard and risk assessment tool that applies modern toxicology and contributes to the sustainable development of nanotechnological products. It ensures that no studies are performed that do not provide crucial data and therefore saves animals and resources.
Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Apical toxic effects; Biodistribution; Biopersistence; Cellular effects; Grouping; Intrinsic material properties; Nanomaterials; Read-across; Risk assessment; System-dependent properties

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25818068     DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.03.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol        ISSN: 0273-2300            Impact factor:   3.271


  47 in total

Review 1.  The asbestos-carbon nanotube analogy: An update.

Authors:  Agnes B Kane; Robert H Hurt; Huajian Gao
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 4.219

2.  Analytical High-resolution Electron Microscopy Reveals Organ-specific Nanoceria Bioprocessing.

Authors:  Uschi M Graham; Robert A Yokel; Alan K Dozier; Lawrence Drummy; Krishnamurthy Mahalingam; Michael T Tseng; Eileen Birch; Joseph Fernback
Journal:  Toxicol Pathol       Date:  2017-11-16       Impact factor: 1.902

3.  How should the completeness and quality of curated nanomaterial data be evaluated?

Authors:  Richard L Marchese Robinson; Iseult Lynch; Willie Peijnenburg; John Rumble; Fred Klaessig; Clarissa Marquardt; Hubert Rauscher; Tomasz Puzyn; Ronit Purian; Christoffer Åberg; Sandra Karcher; Hanne Vriens; Peter Hoet; Mark D Hoover; Christine Ogilvie Hendren; Stacey L Harper
Journal:  Nanoscale       Date:  2016-05-04       Impact factor: 7.790

4.  Effect of alumina (Al2O3) nanoparticles and macroparticles on Trigonella foenum-graceum L. in vitro cultures: assessment of growth parameters and oxidative stress-related responses.

Authors:  Hajar Owji; Shiva Hemmati; Reza Heidari; Makieh Hakimzadeh
Journal:  3 Biotech       Date:  2019-10-25       Impact factor: 2.406

5.  A quantitative framework to group nanoscale and microscale particles by hazard potency to derive occupational exposure limits: Proof of concept evaluation.

Authors:  Nathan M Drew; Eileen D Kuempel; Ying Pei; Feng Yang
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2017-08-05       Impact factor: 3.271

Review 6.  Characterizing risk assessments for the development of occupational exposure limits for engineered nanomaterials.

Authors:  P A Schulte; E D Kuempel; N M Drew
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 3.271

Review 7.  Nanoparticles in Daily Life: Applications, Toxicity and Regulations.

Authors:  Ritu Gupta; Huan Xie
Journal:  J Environ Pathol Toxicol Oncol       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 3.567

Review 8.  Nanomaterials in the aquatic environment: A European Union-United States perspective on the status of ecotoxicity testing, research priorities, and challenges ahead.

Authors:  Henriette Selck; Richard D Handy; Teresa F Fernandes; Stephen J Klaine; Elijah J Petersen
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.742

9.  A Definition and Categorization System for Advanced Materials: The Foundation for Risk-Informed Environmental Health and Safety Testing.

Authors:  Alan Kennedy; Jonathon Brame; Taylor Rycroft; Matthew Wood; Valerie Zemba; Charles Weiss; Matthew Hull; Cary Hill; Charles Geraci; Igor Linkov
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2019-03-25       Impact factor: 4.000

Review 10.  Hurdles in selection process of nanodelivery systems for multidrug-resistant cancer.

Authors:  P S Thakur; A M Khan; S Talegaonkar; F J Ahmad; Z Iqbal
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-04-26       Impact factor: 4.553

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.