| Literature DB >> 36008988 |
Mathias Busch1, Gerrit Bredeck1, Friedrich Waag2, Khosrow Rahimi3, Haribaskar Ramachandran1, Tobias Bessel2, Stephan Barcikowski2, Andreas Herrmann3, Andrea Rossi1, Roel P F Schins1.
Abstract
Due to the ubiquity of environmental micro- and nanoplastics (MNPs), inhalation and ingestion by humans is very likely, but human health effects remain largely unknown. The NLRP3 inflammasome is a key player of the innate immune system and is involved in responses towards foreign particulate matter and the development of chronic intestinal and respiratory inflammatory diseases. We established NLRP3-proficient and -deficient THP-1 cells as an alternative in vitro screening tool to assess the potential of MNPs to activate the NLRP3 inflammasome. By investigating cytokine release (IL-1β and IL-8) and cytotoxicity after treatment with engineered nanomaterials, this in vitro approach was compared to earlier published ex vivo murine bone marrow-derived macrophages and in vivo data. This approach showed a strong correlation with previously published data, verifying that THP-1 cells are a suitable model to investigate NLRP3 inflammasome activation. We then investigated the proinflammatory potential of eight MNPs of different size, shape, and chemical composition. Only amine-modified polystyrene (PS-NH2) acted as a direct NLRP3 activator. However, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyacrylonitrile (PAN), and nylon (PA6) induced a significant increase in IL-8 release in NLRP3-/- cells. Our results suggest that most MNPs are not direct activators of the NLRP3 inflammasome, but specific MNP types might still possess pro-inflammatory potential via other pathways.Entities:
Keywords: IL-1beta; IL-8; carbon nanotubes; fibers; polymers; screening; titanium dioxide
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36008988 PMCID: PMC9406042 DOI: 10.3390/biom12081095
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomolecules ISSN: 2218-273X
TiO2 samples, carbon nanotubes, and MNPs used for experiments.
| Material | Abbreviation | Size | Source | Characterization/ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| TiO2 (P25) | NT1 | 12–18 nm | Evonik, Essen, Germany | [ |
| TiO2 (PC105) | NT2 | 10 nm | Cristal, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia | [ | |
| TiO2 (SX001) | NT3 | 12–15 nm | Solaronix, Aubonne, Switzerland | [ | |
| TiO2 (UT001) | NT4 | 16–17 nm | UNITO, Turin, Italy | [ | |
|
| Multi-walled carbon nanotubes 1 “Mitsui” | Mitsui 7 | 40–100 nm (diameter); 13 µm (length) | Mitsui & Co., Tokyo, Japan | [ |
| Multi-walled carbon nanotubes 2 “NM400” | NM400 | 30 nm (diameter); 5 µm (length) | JRC repository, Ispra, Italy | [ | |
|
| Amine-modified polystyrene spheres | PS-NH2 | 50 nm | Sigma Aldrich, Schnelldorf, Germany (L0780) | [ |
| Polystyrene spheres | PS | 50 nm | Polysciences Inc., Warrington, PA, USA (08691–10) | [ | |
| Polyvinyl chloride powder | PVC | 235 nm (mode) | Werth–Metall, Erfurt, Germany | [ | |
| Polyethylene spheres | PE | 611 nm (mode) | Cospheric LLC, Santa Barbara, CA, USA | [ | |
| Polyethylene terephthalate fragments | PET | 16 nm (nanofraction); 5.7 µm (microfraction) | Produced via laser ablation | ||
| Polyester fibers | PES | 17.5 µm (diameter); 10 µm (length) | Produced via cryotome | ||
| Polyacrylonitrile fibers | PAN | 18.5 µm (diameter); 10 µm (length) | Produced via cryotome | ||
| Polyamide 6 (nylon) fibers | PA6 | 27.5 µm (diameter); 10 µm (length) | Produced via cryotome |
Figure 1(A) Particle size distribution of laser-generated colloidal PET nanoparticles determined by TEM analysis (1011 particles were analyzed). (B) Particle size distribution of PET microparticles determined by light microscopy at a magnification of 5× (1050 particles were analyzed).
Figure 2Fiber length distribution of (A) PES, (B) PAN, and (C) PA6 microfibers as determined by SEM analysis.
Figure 3Release of IL-1β (A) and IL-8 (B), as well as LDH activity (C) in the supernatant of PMA-differentiated THP-1 WT (full bars) or NLRP3 (open bars) cells after 24 h treatment with 10 ng/mL LPS. Mean ± SD of N = 5, *** p < 0.001 compared to the respective control, ### p < 0.001 compared to WT cells.
Figure 4Release of IL-1β (A) and IL-8 (B), as well as LDH activity (C) in the supernatant of PMA-differentiated THP-1 WT (full bars) or NLRP3 (open bars) cells after 24 h treatment with 50 µg/cm2 of four different TiO2 samples. Cytokine data is depicted as relative values compared to the WT control, LDH data is depicted as relative values compared to the respective control. Mean ± SD of N = 4, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, and *** p < 0.001 compared to the respective control.
Figure 5Release of IL-1β (A) and IL-8 (B), as well as LDH activity (C) in the supernatant of PMA-differentiated THP-1 WT (full bars) or NLRP3 (open bars) cells after 24 h treatment with 50 µg/cm2 of two different MWCNTs. Cytokine data is depicted as relative values compared to the WT control, LDH data is depicted as relative values compared to the respective control. Mean ± SD of N = 4, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, and *** p < 0.001 compared to the respective control.
Figure 6Release of IL-1β (A) and IL-8 (B), as well as LDH activity (C) in the supernatant of PMA-differentiated THP-1 WT (full bars) or NLRP3 (open bars) cells after 24 h treatment with 50 µg/cm2 of different plastic particles. Cytokine data is depicted as relative values compared to the WT control, LDH data is depicted as relative values compared to the respective control. Mean ± SD of N = 4, * p < 0.05 and *** p < 0.001 compared to the respective control.