Literature DB >> 26111608

Comparative assessment of nanomaterial definitions and safety evaluation considerations.

Darrell R Boverhof1, Christina M Bramante2, John H Butala3, Shaun F Clancy4, Mark Lafranconi5, Jay West6, Steve C Gordon7.   

Abstract

Nanomaterials continue to bring promising advances to science and technology. In concert have come calls for increased regulatory oversight to ensure their appropriate identification and evaluation, which has led to extensive discussions about nanomaterial definitions. Numerous nanomaterial definitions have been proposed by government, industry, and standards organizations. We conducted a comprehensive comparative assessment of existing nanomaterial definitions put forward by governments to highlight their similarities and differences. We found that the size limits used in different definitions were inconsistent, as were considerations of other elements, including agglomerates and aggregates, distributional thresholds, novel properties, and solubility. Other important differences included consideration of number size distributions versus weight distributions and natural versus intentionally-manufactured materials. Overall, the definitions we compared were not in alignment, which may lead to inconsistent identification and evaluation of nanomaterials and could have adverse impacts on commerce and public perceptions of nanotechnology. We recommend a set of considerations that future discussions of nanomaterial definitions should consider for describing materials and assessing their potential for health and environmental impacts using risk-based approaches within existing assessment frameworks. Our intent is to initiate a dialogue aimed at achieving greater clarity in identifying those nanomaterials that may require additional evaluation, not to propose a formal definition.
Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Definitions; Nanomaterial; Risk evaluation

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26111608     DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.06.001

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


  45 in total

1.  Clinical Cancer Nanomedicine.

Authors:  Joy Wolfram; Mauro Ferrari
Journal:  Nano Today       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 20.722

2.  Insuring nanotech requires effective risk communication.

Authors:  Finbarr Murphy; Martin Mullins; Karena Hester; Allen Gelwick; Janeck J Scott-Fordsmand; Trevor Maynard
Journal:  Nat Nanotechnol       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 39.213

3.  Methodological, political and legal issues in the assessment of the effects of nanotechnology on human health.

Authors:  Irina Guseva Canu; Paul A Schulte; Michael Riediker; Liliya Fatkhutdinova; Enrico Bergamaschi
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 4.  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 5.  Applications of Graphene Quantum Dots in Biomedical Sensors.

Authors:  Bhargav D Mansuriya; Zeynep Altintas
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-02-16       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 6.  Nanotechnology to the rescue: using nano-enabled approaches in microbiological food safety and quality.

Authors:  Mary Eleftheriadou; Georgios Pyrgiotakis; Philip Demokritou
Journal:  Curr Opin Biotechnol       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 9.740

Review 7.  Understanding nanoparticle endocytosis to improve targeting strategies in nanomedicine.

Authors:  Mauro Sousa de Almeida; Eva Susnik; Barbara Drasler; Patricia Taladriz-Blanco; Alke Petri-Fink; Barbara Rothen-Rutishauser
Journal:  Chem Soc Rev       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 54.564

8.  Designing inorganic nanomaterials for vaccines and immunotherapies.

Authors:  Krystina L Hess; Igor L Medintz; Christopher M Jewell
Journal:  Nano Today       Date:  2019-05-29       Impact factor: 20.722

9.  How reliably can a material be classified as a nanomaterial? Available particle-sizing techniques at work.

Authors:  Frank Babick; Johannes Mielke; Wendel Wohlleben; Stefan Weigel; Vasile-Dan Hodoroaba
Journal:  J Nanopart Res       Date:  2016-06-14       Impact factor: 2.253

Review 10.  Development of a Job-Exposure Matrix for Ultrafine Particle Exposure: The MatPUF JEM.

Authors:  Sabyne Audignon-Durand; Céline Gramond; Stéphane Ducamp; Guyguy Manangama; Alain Garrigou; Fleur Delva; Patrick Brochard; Aude Lacourt
Journal:  Ann Work Expo Health       Date:  2021-06-12       Impact factor: 2.179

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.