Hazard Assessment of Benchmark Metal-Based Nanomaterials Through a Set of In Vitro Genotoxicity Assays
- PMID: 35583651
- DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-88071-2_14
Hazard Assessment of Benchmark Metal-Based Nanomaterials Through a Set of In Vitro Genotoxicity Assays
Erratum in
-
Correction to: Hazard Assessment of Benchmark Metal-Based Nanomaterials Through a Set of In Vitro Genotoxicity Assays.Adv Exp Med Biol. 2022;1357:C1. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-88071-2_18. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2022. PMID: 35849313 No abstract available.
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.
Keywords: Cerium dioxide; DNA damage; Genotoxicity; Mutagenicity; Nanomaterials; Silver nanorods/wires; Titanium dioxide.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
Similar articles
-
In vitro genotoxicity testing of four reference metal nanomaterials, titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, cerium oxide and silver: towards reliable hazard assessment.Mutagenesis. 2017 Jan;32(1):117-126. doi: 10.1093/mutage/gew060. Epub 2016 Nov 12. Mutagenesis. 2017. PMID: 27838631
-
Genotoxicity Assessment of Nanomaterials: Recommendations on Best Practices, Assays, and Methods.Toxicol Sci. 2018 Aug 1;164(2):391-416. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfy100. Toxicol Sci. 2018. PMID: 29701824 Review.
-
Nanomaterials induce DNA-protein crosslink and DNA oxidation: A mechanistic study with RTG-2 fish cell line and Comet assay modifications.Chemosphere. 2019 Jan;215:703-709. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.10.118. Epub 2018 Oct 17. Chemosphere. 2019. PMID: 30347365
-
In Vitro Approaches for Assessing the Genotoxicity of Nanomaterials.Methods Mol Biol. 2019;1894:83-122. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-8916-4_6. Methods Mol Biol. 2019. PMID: 30547457
-
The role of the enzyme-modified comet assay in in vivo studies.Toxicol Lett. 2020 Jul 1;327:58-68. doi: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2020.03.016. Epub 2020 Apr 2. Toxicol Lett. 2020. PMID: 32247831
Cited by
-
Developing a Multi-Method Approach for Understanding Cellular Uptake and Biological Response: Investigating Co-Exposure of Macrophage-like Differentiated THP-1 Cells to Al2O3 and CeO2 Nanoparticles.Molecules. 2025 Apr 7;30(7):1647. doi: 10.3390/molecules30071647. Molecules. 2025. PMID: 40286244 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of the cyto- and genotoxicity of two types of cellulose nanomaterials using human intestinal cells and in vitro digestion simulation.Arch Toxicol. 2025 Feb;99(2):575-596. doi: 10.1007/s00204-024-03911-2. Epub 2024 Dec 24. Arch Toxicol. 2025. PMID: 39718590 Free PMC article.
-
Toxicological Assessment of Cellulose Nanomaterials: Oral Exposure.Nanomaterials (Basel). 2022 Sep 27;12(19):3375. doi: 10.3390/nano12193375. Nanomaterials (Basel). 2022. PMID: 36234501 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Bettencourt A, Gonçalves LM, Gramacho AC, Vieira A, Rolo D, Martins C et al (2020) Analysis of the characteristics and cytotoxicity of titanium dioxide nanomaterials following simulated in vitro digestion. Nano 10(8):1516. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10081516 - DOI
-
- Collins AR, Annangi B, Rubio L, Marcos R, Dorn M, Merker C et al (2017) High throughput toxicity screening and intracellular detection of nanomaterials. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 9(1):e1413. https://doi.org/10.1002/wnan.1413 - DOI
-
- Doak SH, Manshian B, Jenkins GJS, Singh N (2012) In vitro genotoxicity testing strategy for nanomaterials and the adaptation of current OECD guidelines. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen 745(1–2):104–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2011.09.013 - DOI
-
- Louro H, Saruga A, Santos J, Pinhão M, Silva MJ (2019) Biological impact of metal nanomaterials in relation to their physicochemical characteristics. Toxicol In Vitro 56:172–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tiv.2019.01.018 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Elespuru R, Pfuhler S, Aardema MJ, Chen T, Doak SH, Doherty A et al (2018) Genotoxicity assessment of nanomaterials: recommendations on best practices, assays, and methods. Toxicol Sci 164(2):391–416. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfy100 - DOI - PubMed
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous