Article

Genotoxicity of inhaled nanosized TiO2 in mice

Nanosafety Research Center, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, FI-00250 Helsinki, Finland.
Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis (Impact Factor: 4.44). 11/2011; 745(1-2):58-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2011.10.011
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In vitro studies have suggested that nanosized titanium dioxide (TiO(2)) is genotoxic. The significance of these findings with respect to in vivo effects is unclear, as few in vivo studies on TiO(2) genotoxicity exist. Recently, nanosized TiO(2) administered in drinking water was reported to increase, e.g., micronuclei (MN) in peripheral blood polychromatic erythrocytes (PCEs) and DNA damage in leukocytes. Induction of micronuclei in mouse PCEs was earlier also described for pigment-grade TiO(2) administered intraperitoneally. The apparent systemic genotoxic effects have been suggested to reflect secondary genotoxicity of TiO(2) due to inflammation. However, a recent study suggested that induction of DNA damage in mouse bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) cells after intratracheal instillation of nanosized or fine TiO(2) is independent of inflammation. We examined here, if inhalation of freshly generated nanosized TiO(2) (74% anatase, 26% brookite; 5 days, 4 h/day) at 0.8, 7.2, and (the highest concentration allowing stable aerosol production) 28.5 mg/m(3) could induce genotoxic effects in C57BL/6J mice locally in the lungs or systematically in peripheral PCEs. DNA damage was assessed by the comet assay in lung epithelial alveolar type II and Clara cells sampled immediately following the exposure. MN were analyzed by acridine orange staining in blood PCEs collected 48 h after the last exposure. A dose-dependent deposition of Ti in lung tissue was seen. Although the highest exposure level produced a clear increase in neutrophils in BAL fluid, indicating an inflammatory effect, no significant effect on the level of DNA damage in lung epithelial cells or micronuclei in PCEs was observed, suggesting no genotoxic effects by the 5-day inhalation exposure to nanosized TiO(2) anatase. Our inhalation exposure resulted in much lower systemic TiO(2) doses than the previous oral and intraperitoneal treatments, and lung epithelial cells probably received considerably less TiO(2) than BAL cells in the earlier intratracheal study.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Antti Joonas Koivisto, Jan 12, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
183 Views
  • Source
    • "Alltogether 46 studies investigating the in vivo genotoxicity of nanomaterials were identified by literature search. 19 of these studies were negative (Lindberg et al., 2012; Landsiedel et al., 2010; Saber et al., 2011; Naya et al., 2012; Rehn et al., 2003; Boisen et al., 2012; Ema et al., 2012; Wessels et al., 2011; Wu et al., 2010; Estevanato et al., 2011; Kim et al., 2011; Kim et al., 2008; Schulz et al., 2012; Sayes et al., 2010; Dandekar et al., 2010; Shinohara et al., 2009; Sadiq et al., 2012; Tavares et al., 2012; Li et al., 2012b). Note that most of these studies do not indicate a lack of evidence for genotoxicity as the doses tested were low and/or it was not shown that the material reached the tissue investigated for genotoxicity in sufficient amounts. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nanotechnology offers enormous potential for technological progress. Fortunately, early and intensive efforts have been invested in investigating toxicology and safety aspects of this new technology. However, despite there being more than 6,000 publications on nanotoxicology, some key questions still have to be answered and paradigms need to be challenged. Here, we present a view on the field of nanotoxicology to stimulate the discussion on major knowledge gaps and the critical appraisal of concepts or dogma. First, in the ongoing debate as to whether nanoparticles may harbour a specific toxicity due to their size, we support the view that there is at present no evidence of 'nanospecific' mechanisms of action; no step-change in hazard was observed so far for particles below 100 nm in one dimension. Therefore, it seems unjustified to consider all consumer products containing nanoparticles a priori as hazardous. Second, there is no evidence so far that fundamentally different biokinetics of nanoparticles would trigger toxicity. However, data are sparse whether nanoparticles may accumulate to an extent high enough to cause chronic adverse effects. To facilitate hazard assessment, we propose to group nanomaterials into three categories according to the route of exposure and mode of action, respectively: Category 1 comprises nanomaterials for which toxicity is mediated by the specific chemical properties of its components, such as released ions or functional groups on the surface. Nanomaterials belonging to this category have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, depending on their chemical identity. Category 2 focuses on rigid biopersistent respirable fibrous nanomaterials with a specific geometry and high aspect ratio (so-called WHO fibres). For these fibres, hazard assessment can be based on the experiences with asbestos. Category 3 focuses on respirable granular biodurable particles (GBP) which, after inhalation, may cause inflammation and secondary mutagenicity that may finally lead to lung cancer. After intravenous, oral or dermal exposure, nanoscaled GBPs investigated apparently did not show 'nanospecific' effects so far. Hazard assessment of GBPs may be based on the knowledge available for granular particles. In conclusion, we believe the proposed categorization system will facilitate future hazard assessments.
    Archives of Toxicology 10/2014; DOI:10.1007/s00204-014-1383-7 · 5.08 Impact Factor
  • Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis 04/2012; 745(1-2):1-3. DOI:10.1016/j.mrgentox.2012.03.010 · 4.44 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The widespread use of titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles in consumer products increases the probability of exposure to humans and the environment. Although TiO2 nanoparticles have been shown to induce DNA damage (comet assay) and chromosome damage (micronucleus assay, MN) in vitro, no study has systematically assessed the influence of medium composition on the physicochemical characteristics and genotoxicity of TiO2 nanoparticles. We assessed TiO2 nanoparticle agglomeration, cellular interaction, induction of genotoxicity, and influence on cell cycle in human lung epithelial cells using three different nanoparticle-treatment media: keratinocyte growth medium (KGMTM) medium plus 0.1% bovine-serum albumin (KB); a synthetic broncheoalveolar lavage fluid containing PBS and 0.6% bovine-serum albumin and 0.001% surfactant (DM); or KGMTM with 10% fetal bovine serum (KF). The comet assay showed that TiO2 nanoparticles induced similar amounts of DNA damage in all three media, independent of the amount of agglomeration, cellular interaction, or cell-cycle changes measured by flow cytometry. In contrast, TiO2 nanoparticles induced MN only in KF, which is the medium that facilitated the lowest amount of agglomeration, the greatest amount of nanoparticle cellular interaction, and the highest population of cells accumulating in S phase. These results with TiO2 nanoparticles in KF demonstrate an association between medium composition, particle uptake, and nanoparticle interaction with cells, leading to chromosomal damage as measured by the MN assay.
    ACS Nano 02/2013; 7(3). DOI:10.1021/nn302280n · 12.03 Impact Factor
Show more