Literature DB >> 30286672

Differences in the toxicity of cerium dioxide nanomaterials after inhalation can be explained by lung deposition, animal species and nanoforms.

Susan Dekkers1, Lan Ma-Hock2, Iseult Lynch3, Mike Russ4, Mark R Miller5, Roel P F Schins6, Jana Keller2, Isabella Römer3, Karin Küttler2, Volker Strauss2, Wim H De Jong1, Robert Landsiedel2, Flemming R Cassee1,7.   

Abstract

Considerable differences in pulmonary responses have been observed in animals exposed to cerium dioxide nanoparticles via inhalation. These differences in pulmonary toxicity might be explained by differences in lung deposition, species susceptibility or physicochemical characteristics of the tested cerium dioxide nanoforms (i.e. same chemical substance, different size, shape, surface area or surface chemistry). In order to distinguish the relative importance of these different influencing factors, we performed a detailed analysis of the data from several inhalation studies with different exposure durations, species and nanoforms, namely published data on NM211 and NM212 (JRC repository), NanoAmor (commercially available) and our published and unpublished data on PROM (industry provided). Data were analyzed by comparing the observed pulmonary responses at similar external and internal dose levels. Our analyses confirm that rats are more sensitive to developing pulmonary inflammation compared to mice. The observed differences in responses do not result purely from differences in the delivered and retained doses (expressed in particle mass as well as surface area). In addition, the different nanoforms assessed showed differences in toxic potency likely due to differences in their physicochemical parameters. Primary particle and aggregate/agglomerate size distributions have a substantial impact on the deposited dose and consequently on the pulmonary response. However, in our evaluation size could not fully explain the difference observed in the analyzed studies indicating that the pulmonary response also depends on other physicochemical characteristics of the particles. It remains to be determined to what extent these findings can be generalized to other poorly soluble nanomaterials.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cerium dioxide; inhalation; lung deposition; nanoform; nanomaterial; species differences; toxicity

Year:  2018        PMID: 30286672     DOI: 10.1080/08958378.2018.1516834

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Inhal Toxicol        ISSN: 0895-8378            Impact factor:   2.724


  5 in total

1.  Evaluation of the Nose-to-Brain Transport of Different Physicochemical Forms of Uranium after Exposure via Inhalation of a UO4 Aerosol in the Rat.

Authors:  Chrystelle Ibanez; David Suhard; Christelle Elie; Teni Ebrahimian; Philippe Lestaevel; Audrey Roynette; Bernadette Dhieux-Lestaevel; François Gensdarmes; Karine Tack; Christine Tessier
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2019-09-30       Impact factor: 9.031

2.  Evaluation of neurological effects of cerium dioxide nanoparticles doped with different amounts of zirconium following inhalation exposure in mouse models of Alzheimer's and vascular disease.

Authors:  Tina Wahle; Adriana Sofranko; Susan Dekkers; Mark R Miller; Harm J Heusinkveld; Catrin Albrecht; Flemming R Cassee; Roel P F Schins
Journal:  Neurochem Int       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 3.921

3.  Antioxidant activity of cerium dioxide nanoparticles and nanorods in scavenging hydroxyl radicals.

Authors:  Alexander Filippi; Fobang Liu; Jake Wilson; Steven Lelieveld; Karsten Korschelt; Ting Wang; Yueshe Wang; Tobias Reich; Ulrich Pöschl; Wolfgang Tremel; Haijie Tong
Journal:  RSC Adv       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 4.036

4.  Safe-and-Sustainable-by-Design Framework Based on a Prospective Life Cycle Assessment: Lessons Learned from a Nano-Titanium Dioxide Case Study.

Authors:  Georgios Archimidis Tsalidis; Lya G Soeteman-Hernández; Cornelle W Noorlander; Saeed Saedy; J Ruud van Ommen; Martina G Vijver; Gijsbert Korevaar
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-04-02       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Dry Generation of CeO2 Nanoparticles and Deposition onto a Co-Culture of A549 and THP-1 Cells in Air-Liquid Interface-Dosimetry Considerations and Comparison to Submerged Exposure.

Authors:  Francesca Cappellini; Sebastiano Di Bucchianico; Venkatanaidu Karri; Siiri Latvala; Maria Malmlöf; Maria Kippler; Karine Elihn; Jonas Hedberg; Inger Odnevall Wallinder; Per Gerde; Hanna L Karlsson
Journal:  Nanomaterials (Basel)       Date:  2020-03-27       Impact factor: 5.076

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.