Cytotoxicity and Genotoxicity of Nanosized and Microsized Titanium Dioxide and Iron Oxide Particles in Syrian Hamster Embryo Cells

Abstract

Potential differences in the toxicological properties of nanosized and non-nanosized particles have been notably pointed out for titanium dioxide (TiO(2)) particles, which are currently widely produced and used in many industrial areas. Nanoparticles of the iron oxides magnetite (Fe(3)O(4)) and hematite (Fe(2)O(3)) also have many industrial applications but their toxicological properties are less documented than those of TiO(2). In the present study, the in vitro cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of commercially available nanosized and microsized anatase TiO(2), rutile TiO(2), Fe(3)O(4), and Fe(2)O(3) particles were compared in Syrian hamster embryo (SHE) cells. Samples were characterized for chemical composition, primary particle size, crystal phase, shape, and specific surface area. In acellular assays, TiO(2) and iron oxide particles were able to generate reactive oxygen species (ROS). At the same mass dose, all nanoparticles produced higher levels of ROS than their microsized counterparts. Measurement of particle size in the SHE culture medium showed that primary nanoparticles and microparticles are present in the form of micrometric agglomerates of highly poly-dispersed size. Uptake of primary particles and agglomerates by SHE exposed for 24 h was observed for all samples. TiO(2) samples were found to be more cytotoxic than iron oxide samples. Concerning primary size effects, anatase TiO(2), rutile TiO(2), and Fe(2)O(3) nanoparticles induced higher cytotoxicity than their microsized counterparts after 72 h of exposure. Over this treatment time, anatase TiO(2) and Fe(2)O(3) nanoparticles also produced more intracellular ROS compared to the microsized particles. However, similar levels of DNA damage were observed in the comet assay after 24 h of exposure to anatase nanoparticles and microparticles. Rutile microparticles were found to induce more DNA damage than the nanosized particles. However, no significant increase in DNA damage was detected from nanosized and microsized iron oxides. None of the samples tested showed significant induction of micronuclei formation after 24 h of exposure. In agreement with previous size-comparison studies, we suggest that in vitro cytotoxicity and genotoxicity induced by metal oxide nanoparticles are not always higher than those induced by their bulk counterparts.

High-Throughput Screening Platform for Engineered Nanoparticle-Mediated Genotoxicity Using CometChip Technology

“…These results differ from published findings on the genotoxicity of iron oxide, where no definitive genotoxic result was obtained from nanosized or micrometer-sized hematite particle exposures in Syrian hamster embryo cells. 76 Karlsson and co-workers found similar negative results when evaluating hematite and magnetite nanoparticles. 77 Certain confounders such as cell type could be involved in conflicting reports of toxicity as particle uptake can be influenced by the cell phenotype.…”

A Proteomic View to Characterize the Effect of Chitosan Nanoparticle to Hepatic Cells: Is Chitosan Nanoparticle an Enhancer of PI3K/AKT1/mTOR Pathway?

“…Those results indicate that the chitosan nanoparticle was no significant cytotoxicity observed; in addition, the chitosan nanoparticle improved the cell growth and proliferation. In previous studies, it was indicated that the metal or metal oxide nanoparticles were with high cell toxicity [22–24]. Unlike metal or metal oxide nanoparticles, the chitosan nanoparticle was nontoxic.…”

Titanium dioxide nanoparticles: a review of current toxicological data

“…[172] treated SHE cells with 1.0 μg/cm 2 of TiO 2 particle for 12–72 h. The micronuclei assay revealed a significant increase in MN induction in SHE cells after NP treatment, whereas TiO 2 FPs did not show significant induction of MN formation. However, other investigators who used the same cell line have stated that cytotoxicity and genotoxicity induced by metal oxide NPs are not always higher than those induced by their FP counterparts (14–35 nm; 5,10, and 50 μg/cm 2 ) [173]. Lu et al .…”