Probing the Cytotoxicity of Nanoparticles: Experimental Pitfalls and Artifacts

Domey, Jenny; Haslauer, Lisa; Grau, Ina; Strobel, Claudia; Kettering, Melanie; Hilger, Ingrid

doi:10.1007/11663_2013_8

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A number of factors could be based on these conflicting results. Although differences in the physicochemical characteristics of these nanoparticles, such as size and surface modification, seem to be the main reason for these variations (Hong et al, 2011), inattention to interference of the tested nanoparticles with the experimental procedures can also be responsible for false results (either positive or negative) (Domey et al, 2014). Correct in vitro assessment of nanoparticle cytotoxicity entails a careful choice of the test systems and it should always include the analysis of possible interferences with the optical detection methods and reagents, the ability to convert the substrates and/or the influence on enzymatic activity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro cytotoxicity of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles on neuronal and glial cells. Evaluation of nanoparticle interference with viability tests

Costa

Brandão

Bessa

et al. 2015

J of Applied Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (ION) have attracted great interest for use in several biomedical fields. In general, they are considered biocompatible, but little is known of their effects on the human nervous system. The main objective of this work was to evaluate the cytotoxicity of two ION (magnetite), coated with silica and oleic acid, previously determining the possible interference of the ION with the methodological procedures to assure the reliability of the results obtained. Human neuroblastoma SHSY5Y and glioblastoma A172 cells were exposed to different concentrations of ION (5-300 μg ml -1 ), prepared in complete and serum-free cell culture medium for three exposure times (3, 6 and 24 h). Cytotoxicity was evaluated by means of the MTT, neutral red uptake and alamar blue assays. Characterization of the main physical-chemical properties of the ION tested was also performed. Results demonstrated that both ION could significantly alter absorbance readings. To reduce these interferences, protocols were modified by introducing additional washing steps and cell-free systems. Significant decreases in cell viability were observed for both cell lines in specific conditions by all assays. In general, oleic acid-coated ION were less cytotoxic than silica-coated ION; besides, a serum-protective effect was observed for both ION studied and cell lines. These results contribute to increase the knowledge of the potential harmful effects of ION on the human nervous system. Understanding these effects is essential to establish satisfactory regulatory policies on the safe use of magnetite nanoparticles in biomedical applications.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro cytotoxicity of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles on neuronal and glial cells. Evaluation of nanoparticle interference with viability tests

Costa

Brandão

Bessa

et al. 2015

J of Applied Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is unclear. It has been suggested that the WST-1 assay avoids certain interference problems with some carbon based nanomaterials, compared to some other cytotoxicity assays (Domey et al, 2013 (Zhang et al, 2012). This initial pool of descriptors was reduced to two via statistical feature selection: the conduction band energy and the ionic index of the metal cation.…”

Section: Modelling Clustermentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspectives from the NanoSafety Modelling Cluster on the validation criteria for (Q)SAR models used in nanotechnology

Puzyn

Jeliazkova

Sarimveis

et al. 2018

Food and Chemical Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nanotechnology and the production of nanomaterials have been expanding rapidly in recent years. Since many types of engineered nanoparticles are suspected to be toxic to living organisms and to have a negative impact on the environment, the process of designing new nanoparticles and their applications must be accompanied by a thorough risk analysis. (Quantitative) Structure-Activity Relationship ([Q]SAR) modelling creates promising options among the available methods for the risk assessment. These in silico models can be used to predict a variety of properties, including the toxicity of newly designed nanoparticles. However, (Q)SAR models must be appropriately validated to ensure the clarity, consistency and reliability of predictions. This paper is a joint initiative from recently completed European research projects focused on developing (Q)SAR methodology for nanomaterials. The aim was to interpret and expand the guidance for the well-known "OECD Principles for the Validation, for Regulatory Purposes, of (Q)SAR Models", with reference to nano-(Q)SAR, and present our opinions on the criteria to be fulfilled for models developed for nanoparticles.

show abstract

“…For example, various kinds of nanomaterial “interference” with commonly used in vitro (cell-based) toxicity assays have been noted which may lead to overestimation or underestimation of toxicity. 70,98,99,102–107,183–186 In in vivo aquatic toxicity studies, nanomaterials adhering to the surface of organisms may inhibit movement – leading to overestimation of mortality. 101,187 …”

Section: Key Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

How should the completeness and quality of curated nanomaterial data be evaluated?

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nanotechnology is of increasing significance. Curation of nanomaterial data into electronic databases offers opportunities to better understand and predict nanomaterials’ behaviour. This supports innovation in, and regulation of, nanotechnology. It is commonly understood that curated data need to be sufficiently complete and of sufficient quality to serve their intended purpose. However, assessing data completeness and quality is non-trivial in general and is arguably especially difficult in the nanoscience area, given its highly multidisciplinary nature. The current article, part of the Nanomaterial Data Curation Initiative series, addresses how to assess the completeness and quality of (curated) nanomaterial data. In order to address this key challenge, a variety of related issues are discussed: the meaning and importance of data completeness and quality, existing approaches to their assessment and the key challenges associated with evaluating the completeness and quality of curated nanomaterial data. Considerations which are specific to the nanoscience area and lessons which can be learned from other relevant scientific disciplines are considered. Hence, the scope of this discussion ranges from physicochemical characterisation requirements for nanomaterials and interference of nanomaterials with nanotoxicology assays to broader issues such as minimum information checklists, toxicology data quality schemes and computational approaches that facilitate evaluation of the completeness and quality of (curated) data. This discussion is informed by a literature review and a survey of key nanomaterial data curation stakeholders. Finally, drawing upon this discussion, recommendations are presented concerning the central question: how should the completeness and quality of curated nanomaterial data be evaluated?

show abstract

Probing the Cytotoxicity of Nanoparticles: Experimental Pitfalls and Artifacts

Cited by 8 publications

References 30 publications

In vitro cytotoxicity of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles on neuronal and glial cells. Evaluation of nanoparticle interference with viability tests

In vitro cytotoxicity of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles on neuronal and glial cells. Evaluation of nanoparticle interference with viability tests

Perspectives from the NanoSafety Modelling Cluster on the validation criteria for (Q)SAR models used in nanotechnology

How should the completeness and quality of curated nanomaterial data be evaluated?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About