Toxicology of Carbon Nanomaterials

A special issue of Nanomaterials (ISSN 2079-4991).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 August 2019) | Viewed by 13627

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland
Interests: toxicogenomics; pharmacogenomics; predictive pharmacology; bioinformatics; cheminformatics; nanosafety; multi-omics; gene networks; machine learning; biomarkers
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Helsinki Institute of Life Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
Interests: Systems toxicology; Nanotoxicology; Immunotoxicology

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Engineered nanomaterials based on carbon show unprecedented promise in multiple areas of scientific and technological development. However, concerns regarding their safety have the potential to negatively affect their innovation potential. Over the last few years, in fact, we have learned a great deal about the cytotoxic, genotoxic and immunotoxic potential of certain carbon nanomaterials. We now recognize that material properties such as stiffness, biopersistency and size are contributing to their toxicity, but we still lack robust models explaining their mechanisms of action and toxicity potential. For this, new approaches combining chemistry, biology and data analytics and modelling urgently need to be established. In this Special Issue, we wish to focus on new insights into carbon nanomaterials’ mechanisms of action and their dependency on their intrinsic properties. We warmly welcome contributions in the areas of the in vivo, in vitro, and in silico toxicology of carbon nanomaterials, aiming to formulate models of nano–bio interactions.

Prof. Dr. Dario Greco
Dr. Pia Kinaret
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Nanomaterials is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2900 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Nanotoxicology
  • Carbon nanomaterials
  • Toxicogenomics
  • Systems toxicology
  • Predictive toxicology
  • Immunotoxicology

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

17 pages, 2426 KiB  
Article
Comparative in Vitro Cytotoxicity of Realistic Doses of Benchmark Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes towards Macrophages and Airway Epithelial Cells
by Luisana Di Cristo, Massimiliano G. Bianchi, Martina Chiu, Giuseppe Taurino, Francesca Donato, Giacomo Garzaro, Ovidio Bussolati and Enrico Bergamaschi
Nanomaterials 2019, 9(7), 982; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano9070982 - 6 Jul 2019
Cited by 19 | Viewed by 3463
Abstract
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT) have many outstanding physical and chemical properties that make them useful in many applications in nanotechnology. However, these properties are reported to be potentially harmful for the human body. The effects of low and realistic doses of three well-characterized [...] Read more.
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT) have many outstanding physical and chemical properties that make them useful in many applications in nanotechnology. However, these properties are reported to be potentially harmful for the human body. The effects of low and realistic doses of three well-characterized preparations of MWCNT, obtained from the Joint Research Centre (JRC) (NM-400, NM-401, and NM-402), were assessed in two murine macrophage lines, Raw264.7, of peritoneal origin, and MH-S, derived from alveolar macrophages. Macrophage viability, evaluated with two distinct methods, was significantly lowered by NM-401 (needle-like, average length 4 μm, diameter 67 nm) with IC50 values of 10 μg/cm2, whereas NM-400 and NM-402 (tangled, average lengths 846–1372 nm, diameter 11 nm) had much smaller effects. In contrast, at 10 μg/cm2, NM-400 and NM-402 induced the M1 marker Nos2 and, consistently, a sizable accumulation of nitrites in the medium, whereas NM-401 had no significant effect. None of the MWCNT preparations induced the M2 marker Arg1. Phagocytic activity, assessed in Raw264.7 macrophages, was significantly reduced in cells exposed to NM-401, but not to NM-400 or NM-402. When tested on Calu-3 bronchial epithelial cell monolayers, the three MWCNT preparations did not affect cell viability, but decreased the trans-epithelial electrical resistance at the maximal dose tested (80 μg/cm2), with the most evident effect detected for NM-401, even at 10 μg/cm2. In conclusion, among the possible structural determinants of the toxic effects exerted by MWCNT towards macrophages and airway epithelial cells, shape and length appear the most relevant at low, realistic doses. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Toxicology of Carbon Nanomaterials)
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 3648 KiB  
Article
Ecotoxicological Assessment of Thermally- and Hydrogen-Reduced Graphene Oxide/TiO2 Photocatalytic Nanocomposites Using the Zebrafish Embryo Model
by Halema Al-Kandari, Nadin Younes, Ola Al-Jamal, Zain Z. Zakaria, Huda Najjar, Farah Alserr, Gianfranco Pintus, Maha A. Al-Asmakh, Aboubakr M. Abdullah and Gheyath K. Nasrallah
Nanomaterials 2019, 9(4), 488; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano9040488 - 28 Mar 2019
Cited by 22 | Viewed by 4191
Abstract
Advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) have recently attracted great interest in water pollution management. Using the zebrafish embryo model, we investigated the environmental impacts of two thermally (RGOTi)- and hydrogen (H2RGOTi)-reduced graphene oxide/TiO2 semiconductor photocatalysts recently employed in AOPs. For this [...] Read more.
Advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) have recently attracted great interest in water pollution management. Using the zebrafish embryo model, we investigated the environmental impacts of two thermally (RGOTi)- and hydrogen (H2RGOTi)-reduced graphene oxide/TiO2 semiconductor photocatalysts recently employed in AOPs. For this purpose, acutoxicity, cardiotoxicity, neurobehavioral toxicity, hematopoietic toxicity, and hatching rate were determinate. For the RGOTi, the no observed effect concentration (NOEC, mortality/teratogenicity score <20%) and the median lethal concentration (LC50) were <400 and 748.6 mg/L, respectively. H2RGOTi showed a NOEC similar to RGOTi. However, no significant mortality was detected at all concentrations used in the acutoxicity assay (up to1000 mg/L), thus indicating a hypothetical LC50 higher than 1000 mg/L. According to the Fish and Wildlife Service Acute Toxicity Rating Scale, RGOTi can be classified as “practically not toxic” and H2RGOTi as “relatively harmless”. However, both nanocomposites should be used with caution at concentration higher than the NOEC (400 mg/L), in particular RGOTi, which significantly (i) caused pericardial and yolk sac edema; (ii) decreased the hatching rate, locomotion, and hematopoietic activities; and (iii) affected the heart rate. Indeed, the aforementioned teratogenic phenotypes were less devastating in H2RGOTi-treated embryos, suggesting that the hydrogen-reduced graphene oxide/TiO2 photocatalysts may be more ecofriendly than the thermally-reduced ones. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Toxicology of Carbon Nanomaterials)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

16 pages, 5209 KiB  
Review
Biocompatibility and Carcinogenicity of Carbon Nanotubes as Biomaterials
by Kaoru Aoki and Naoto Saito
Nanomaterials 2020, 10(2), 264; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10020264 - 4 Feb 2020
Cited by 54 | Viewed by 5486
Abstract
With the development of nanotechnology in recent years, there have been concerns about the health effects of nanoparticles. Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are fibrous nanoparticles with a micro-sized length and nano-sized diameter, which exhibit excellent physical properties and are widely studied for their potential [...] Read more.
With the development of nanotechnology in recent years, there have been concerns about the health effects of nanoparticles. Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are fibrous nanoparticles with a micro-sized length and nano-sized diameter, which exhibit excellent physical properties and are widely studied for their potential application in medicine. However, asbestos has been historically shown to cause pleural malignant mesothelioma and lung cancer by inhalation exposure. Because carbon nanotubes are also fibrous nanotubes, some have raised concerns about its possible carcinogenicity. We have reported that there is no clear evidence of carcinogenicity by local and intravenous administration of multi-walled CNTs to cancer mice models. We firmly believe that CNTs can be a safe, new, and high-performance biomaterials by controlling its type, site of administration, and dosage. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Toxicology of Carbon Nanomaterials)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop