Literature DB >> 35979194

Translating nanoparticle dosimetry from conventional in vitro systems to occupational inhalation exposures.

Jordan Ned Smith1,2, Andrew W Skinner1.   

Abstract

As encouraged by Toxicity Testing in the 21st Century, researchers increasingly apply high-throughput in vitro approaches to identify and characterize nanoparticle hazards, including conventional aqueous cell culture systems to assess respiratory hazards. Translating nanoparticle dose from conventional toxicity testing systems to relevant human exposures remains a major challenge for assessing occupational risk of nanoparticle exposures. Here, we explored existing computational tools and data available to translate nanoparticle dose metrics from cellular test systems to inhalation exposures of silver nanoparticles in humans. We used the Multiple-Path Particle Dosimetry (MPPD) Model to predict nanoparticle deposition of humans exposed to 20 and 110 nm silver nanoparticles at 0.9 μg/m3 over an 8 h period, the proposed National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommended exposure limit (REL). MPPD predicts 8.1 and 3.7 μg of silver deposited in an 8 h period for 20 and 110 nm nanoparticles, respectively, with 20 nm particles displaying nearly 11-fold higher total surface area deposited. Peak deposited nanoparticle concentrations occurred more proximal in the pulmonary tract compared to mass deposition patterns (generation 4 vs. generations 20-21, respectively) due to regional differences in lung lining fluid volumes. Assuming 0.4% nanoparticle dissolution by mass measured in previous studies predicted peak concentrations of silver ions in cells of 1.06 and 0.89 μg/mL for 20 and 110 nm particles, respectively. Both predicted concentrations are below the measured toxic threshold of 1.7 μg/mL of silver ions in cells from in vitro assessments. Assuming 4% dissolution by mass predicted 10-fold higher silver concentrations in tissues, peaking at 10.6 and 8.9 μg/mL, for 20 and 110 nm nanoparticles respectively, exceeding the observed in vitro toxic threshold and highlighting the importance and sensitivity of dissolution rates. Overall, this approach offers a framework for extrapolating nanotoxicity results from in vitro cell culture systems to human exposures. Aligning appropriate dose metrics from in vitro and in vivo hazard characterizations and human pulmonary doses from occupational exposures are critical components for successful nanoparticle risk assessment and worker protection providing guidance for designing future in vitro studies aimed at relevant human exposures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dose metrics; Dosimetry modeling; In vitro to in vivo extrapolation; Nanoparticle

Year:  2021        PMID: 35979194      PMCID: PMC9380399          DOI: 10.1016/j.jaerosci.2021.105771

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Aerosol Sci        ISSN: 0021-8502            Impact factor:   4.586


  38 in total

Review 1.  Particokinetics in vitro: dosimetry considerations for in vitro nanoparticle toxicity assessments.

Authors:  Justin G Teeguarden; Paul M Hinderliter; Galya Orr; Brian D Thrall; Joel G Pounds
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2006-11-10       Impact factor: 4.849

2.  Respiratory fluid mechanics.

Authors:  James B Grotberg
Journal:  Phys Fluids (1994)       Date:  2011-02-18       Impact factor: 3.521

3.  Volume and protein concentration of epithelial lining liquid in perfused in situ postnatal sheep lungs.

Authors:  R H Stephens; A R Benjamin; D V Walters
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  1996-06

4.  Exposure assessment of workplaces manufacturing nanosized TiO2 and silver.

Authors:  Ji Hyun Lee; Miran Kwon; Jun Ho Ji; Chang Soo Kang; Kang Ho Ahn; Jeong Hee Han; Il Je Yu
Journal:  Inhal Toxicol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 2.724

5.  Influence of particle size on persistence and clearance of aerosolized silver nanoparticles in the rat lung.

Authors:  Donald S Anderson; Esther S Patchin; Rona M Silva; Dale L Uyeminami; Arjun Sharmah; Ting Guo; Gautom K Das; Jared M Brown; Jonathan Shannahan; Terry Gordon; Lung Chi Chen; Kent E Pinkerton; Laura S Van Winkle
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2015-01-09       Impact factor: 4.849

6.  Pulmonary surfactant mitigates silver nanoparticle toxicity in human alveolar type-I-like epithelial cells.

Authors:  Sinbad Sweeney; Bey Fen Leo; Shu Chen; Nisha Abraham-Thomas; Andrew J Thorley; Andrew Gow; Stephan Schwander; Junfeng Jim Zhang; Milo S P Shaffer; Kian Fan Chung; Mary P Ryan; Alexandra E Porter; Teresa D Tetley
Journal:  Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 5.268

7.  Mode of silver clearance following 28-day inhalation exposure to silver nanoparticles determined from lung burden assessment including post-exposure observation periods.

Authors:  Mi Seong Jo; Jin Kwon Kim; Younghun Kim; Hoi Pin Kim; Hee Sang Kim; Kangho Ahn; Ji Hyun Lee; Elaine M Faustman; Mary Gulumian; Bruce Kelman; Il Je Yu
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2020-03-10       Impact factor: 5.153

8.  Comparative iron oxide nanoparticle cellular dosimetry and response in mice by the inhalation and liquid cell culture exposure routes.

Authors:  Justin G Teeguarden; Vladimir B Mikheev; Kevin R Minard; William C Forsythe; Wei Wang; Gaurav Sharma; Norman Karin; Susan C Tilton; Katrina M Waters; Bahman Asgharian; Owen R Price; Joel G Pounds; Brian D Thrall
Journal:  Part Fibre Toxicol       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 9.400

9.  ISD3: a particokinetic model for predicting the combined effects of particle sedimentation, diffusion and dissolution on cellular dosimetry for in vitro systems.

Authors:  Dennis G Thomas; Jordan N Smith; Brian D Thrall; Donald R Baer; Hadley Jolley; Prabhakaran Munusamy; Vamsi Kodali; Philip Demokritou; Joel Cohen; Justin G Teeguarden
Journal:  Part Fibre Toxicol       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 9.400

Review 10.  Comparison of conventional and advanced in vitro models in the toxicity testing of nanoparticles.

Authors:  Eleonore Fröhlich
Journal:  Artif Cells Nanomed Biotechnol       Date:  2018-06-29       Impact factor: 5.678

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.