| Literature DB >> 28431555 |
Xiaoming Cai1, Anson Lee2, Zhaoxia Ji3, Cynthia Huang4, Chong Hyun Chang3, Xiang Wang3, Yu-Pei Liao5, Tian Xia6,7, Ruibin Li8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The wide application of engineered nanoparticles has induced increasing exposure to humans and environment, which led to substantial concerns on their biosafety. Some metal oxides (MOx) have shown severe toxicity in cells and animals, thus safe designs of MOx with reduced hazard potential are desired. Currently, there is a lack of a simple yet effective safe design approach for the toxic MOx. In this study, we determined the key physicochemical properties of MOx that lead to cytotoxicity and explored a safe design approach for toxic MOx by modifying their hazard properties.Entities:
Keywords: Functionalization; Inflammation; Inhalation; Lung toxicity; Metal oxides; Nanotoxicity; Surface coating
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28431555 PMCID: PMC5399805 DOI: 10.1186/s12989-017-0193-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Part Fibre Toxicol ISSN: 1743-8977 Impact factor: 9.400
Fig. 1Characterizing the physicochemical properties of MO nanoparticles. a TEM images showing the shape and size of MOx, b Dissolution percentage of MO NPs in DI water and acidic solution, and c Determining the oxidative capability of MOx by DCF assay. The dissolution analysis was performed by suspending 50 μg/mL of each of the nanoparticles in deionized water or acidic solution (pH 4.5, HCl), followed by incubation at room temperature for 24 h. The supernatants were collected by centrifugation at 20000 g for 30 min and digested for ICP-OES measurement. For DCF assay, 200 μg/mL MOx suspensions were incubated with DCF solutions at 25 μg/mL for 2 h. The fluorescence emission spectra of the mixed solutions were collected at 500–600 nm with excitation at 490 nm. * p < 0.05 compared to the ion release in water
Fig. 2Assessment of Cell viability in BEAS-2B cells exposed to MOx. Cell viability tests were performed by ATP (left panel) MTS (right panel) assays. BEAS-2B cells were exposed to MOx suspensions (0–200 μg/mL) for 24 h. Then the MTS or ATP assay solutions were added to evaluate cell viabilities by measuring the absorbance or luminescence on a SpectraMax M5 microplate spectrophotometer
Fig. 3Safe design of MOx by surface passivation. a Formation of EDTMP-metal conjugate on MOx surface, b Ion release and oxidative capability of uncoated and EDTMP coated MOx, and c Comparison of ROS generation and cell viabilities in BEAS-2B cells exposed to uncoated and EDTMP coated MOx. The measurement of ion release and oxidative capability was described in the legend of Fig. 1. After 16 h exposure of BEAS-2B cells to 100 μg/mL MO suspensions, intracellular ROS generation was visualized by Mitosox staining. The cell viabilities were determined by MTS assay in BEAS-2B cells after 24 h incubation with 200 μg/mL MO suspensions. * p < 0.05 compared to uncoated MOx
Fig. 4Safety assessment of EDTMP coated MOx in animal lungs. a Differential cell counts in BALF, b LDH and cytokine release in BALF, c H&E staining of lung sections from MO-exposed mice. TiO2, CuO, EDTMP-CuO, Co3O4 or EDTMP-Co3O4 were oropharyngeally administrated at 2 mg/kg (6 mice in each group), while animals received 5 mg/kg quartz exposure were used as positive control. After 40 h, animals were sacrificed to analyze LDH (upper left panel), MCP-1 (upper right panel), LIX (lower left panel) and IL-6 (lower right panel) production in BALF. * p < 0.05 compared to uncoated MOx