Bakhtiyor Rasulev - Genotoxicity of metal oxide nanomaterials: review of recent data and discussion of possible mechanisms

Version 3

      Publication Details (including relevant citation   information):

      Golbamaki, Nazanin; Rasulev, Bakhtiyor; Cassano, Antonio;   Robinson, Richard L. Marchese; Benfenati, Emilio; Leszczynski,   Jerzy; Cronin, Mark T. D.; Nanoscale, 2015, 7 (14) -6388

      Abstract:

      Nanotechnology has rapidly entered into human society,   revolutionized many areas, including technology, medicine and   cosmetics. This progress is due to the many valuable and unique   properties that nanomaterials possess. In turn, these properties   might become an issue of concern when considering potentially   uncontrolled release to the environment. The rapid development of   new nanomaterials thus raises questions about their impact on the   environment and human health. This review focuses on the   potential of nanomaterials to cause genotoxicity and summarizes   recent genotoxicity studies on metal oxide/silica nanomaterials.   Though the number of genotoxicity studies on metal oxide/silica   nanomaterials is still limited, this endpoint has recently   received more attention for nanomaterials, and the number of   related publications has increased. An analysis of these peer   reviewed publications over nearly two decades shows that the test   most employed to evaluate the genotoxicity of these nanomaterials   is the comet assay, followed by micronucleus, Ames and chromosome   aberration tests. Based on the data studied, we concluded that in   the majority of the publications analysed in this review, the   metal oxide (or silica) nanoparticles of the same core chemical   composition did not show different genotoxicity study calls (i.e.   positive or negative) in the same test, although some results are   inconsistent and need to be confirmed by additional experiments.   Where the results are conflicting, it may be due to the following   reasons: (1) variation in size of the nanoparticles; (2)   variations in size distribution; (3) various purities of   nanomaterials; (4) variation in surface areas for nanomaterials   with the same average size; (5) differences in coatings; (6)   differences in crystal structures of the same types of   nanomaterials; (7) differences in size of aggregates in   solution/media; (8) differences in assays; (9) different   concentrations of nanomaterials in assay tests. Indeed, due to   the observed inconsistencies in the recent literature and the   lack of adherence to appropriate, standardized test methods,   reliable genotoxicity assessment of nanomaterials is still   challenging.

       

      Address (URL): http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c4nr06670g