Literature DB >> 35583651

Hazard Assessment of Benchmark Metal-Based Nanomaterials Through a Set of In Vitro Genotoxicity Assays.

Maria Dušinská1, Maria João Silva2,3, Nádia Vital4, Mariana Pinhão4, Naouale El Yamani5, Elise Rundén-Pran5, Henriqueta Louro4,6.   

Abstract

For safety assessment of nanomaterials (NMs), in vitro genotoxicity data based on well-designed experiments is required. Metal-based NMs are amongst the most used in consumer products. In this chapter, we report results for three metal-based NMs, titanium dioxide (NM-100), cerium dioxide (NM-212) and silver (NM-302) in V79 cells, using a set of in vitro genotoxicity assays covering different endpoints: the medium-throughput comet assay and its modified version (with the enzyme formamidopyrimidine DNA glycosylase, Fpg), measuring DNA strand beaks (SBs) and oxidized purines, respectively; the micronucleus (MN) assay, assessing chromosomal damage; and the Hprt gene mutation test. The results generated by this test battery showed that all NMs displayed genotoxic potential. NM-100 induced DNA breaks, DNA oxidation damage and point mutations but not chromosome instability. NM-212 increased the level of DNA oxidation damage, point mutations and increased the MN frequency at the highest concentration tested. NM-302 was moderately cytotoxic and induced gene mutations, but not DNA or chromosome damage. In conclusion, the presented in vitro genotoxicity testing strategy allowed the identification of genotoxic effects caused by three different metal-based NMs, raising concern as to their impact on human health. The results support the use of this in vitro test battery for the genotoxicity assessment of NMs, reducing the use of more expensive, time-consuming and ethically demanding in vivo assays, in compliance with the 3 R's.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cerium dioxide; DNA damage; Genotoxicity; Mutagenicity; Nanomaterials; Silver nanorods/wires; Titanium dioxide

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35583651     DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-88071-2_14

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol        ISSN: 0065-2598            Impact factor:   3.650


  66 in total

1.  Single-walled carbon nanotubes: differential genotoxic potential associated with physico-chemical properties.

Authors:  Bella B Manshian; Gareth Js Jenkins; Paul M Williams; Chris Wright; Andrew R Barron; Andrew P Brown; Nicole Hondow; Peter R Dunstan; Rob Rickman; Ken Brady; Shareen H Doak
Journal:  Nanotoxicology       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 5.913

2.  Impact of anatase titanium dioxide nanoparticles on mutagenic and genotoxic response in Chinese hamster lung fibroblast cells (V-79): The role of cellular uptake.

Authors:  Abhishek Kumar Jain; Violet Aileen Senapati; Divya Singh; Kavita Dubey; Renuka Maurya; Alok Kumar Pandey
Journal:  Food Chem Toxicol       Date:  2017-04-08       Impact factor: 6.023

3.  Critical factors to be considered when testing nanomaterials for genotoxicity with the comet assay.

Authors:  Anna Huk; Andrew R Collins; Naouale El Yamani; Constanca Porredon; Amaya Azqueta; Joaquín de Lapuente; Maria Dusinska
Journal:  Mutagenesis       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 3.000

4.  Biological impact of metal nanomaterials in relation to their physicochemical characteristics.

Authors:  Henriqueta Louro; Andreia Saruga; Joana Santos; Mariana Pinhão; Maria João Silva
Journal:  Toxicol In Vitro       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 3.500

Review 5.  Mechanisms of genotoxicity. A review of in vitro and in vivo studies with engineered nanoparticles.

Authors:  Zuzana Magdolenova; Andrew Collins; Ashutosh Kumar; Alok Dhawan; Vicki Stone; Maria Dusinska
Journal:  Nanotoxicology       Date:  2013-03-20       Impact factor: 5.913

Review 6.  Genotoxicity Assessment of Nanomaterials: Recommendations on Best Practices, Assays, and Methods.

Authors:  Rosalie Elespuru; Stefan Pfuhler; Marilyn J Aardema; Tao Chen; Shareen H Doak; Ann Doherty; Christopher S Farabaugh; Julia Kenny; Mugimane Manjanatha; Brinda Mahadevan; Martha M Moore; Gladys Ouédraogo; Leon F Stankowski; Jennifer Y Tanir
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 4.849

7.  Genotoxicity and cytotoxicity of multi-wall carbon nanotubes in cultured Chinese hamster lung cells in comparison with chrysotile A fibers.

Authors:  Masumi Asakura; Toshiaki Sasaki; Toshie Sugiyama; Mitsutoshi Takaya; Shigeki Koda; Kasuke Nagano; Heihachiro Arito; Shoji Fukushima
Journal:  J Occup Health       Date:  2010-04-02       Impact factor: 2.708

8.  Genotoxic evaluation of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in vivo and in vitro.

Authors:  Zhangjian Chen; Yun Wang; Te Ba; Yang Li; Ji Pu; Tian Chen; Yanshuang Song; Yongen Gu; Qin Qian; Jinglin Yang; Guang Jia
Journal:  Toxicol Lett       Date:  2014-03-02       Impact factor: 4.372

9.  Impact of nanosilver on various DNA lesions and HPRT gene mutations - effects of charge and surface coating.

Authors:  Anna Huk; Emilia Izak-Nau; Naouale El Yamani; Hilde Uggerud; Marit Vadset; Beata Zasonska; Albert Duschl; Maria Dusinska
Journal:  Part Fibre Toxicol       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 9.400

10.  Is the toxic potential of nanosilver dependent on its size?

Authors:  Anna Huk; Emilia Izak-Nau; Bogumila Reidy; Matthew Boyles; Albert Duschl; Iseult Lynch; Maria Dušinska
Journal:  Part Fibre Toxicol       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 9.400

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Toxicological Assessment of Cellulose Nanomaterials: Oral Exposure.

Authors:  Nádia Vital; Célia Ventura; Michel Kranendonk; Maria João Silva; Henriqueta Louro
Journal:  Nanomaterials (Basel)       Date:  2022-09-27       Impact factor: 5.719

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.