Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16209704›Full record

ArticleParticle and fibre toxicology2005

Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: elements of a screening strategy.

Günter Oberdörster, Andrew Maynard, Ken Donaldson, Vincent Castranova, Julie Fitzpatrick, Kevin Ausman, Janet Carter, Barbara Karn, Wolfgang Kreyling, David Lai and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Particle and fibre toxicology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 389 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
389citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
48.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

389 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2,117 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Toxicity Evaluation of TiOFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Role of Nanoformulations in the Treatment of Lung Cancer.Recent patents on nanotechnology · 2025
    Review
  20. Review

329 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 12 institutions in 3 countries.

Günter OberdörsterDepartment of Environmental Medicine, University of Rochester, PO Box EHSC, Rochester, NY 14642, USA. gunter_oberdorster@urmc.rochester.edu
Andrew Maynard
Ken Donaldson
Vincent Castranova
Julie Fitzpatrick
Kevin Ausman
Janet Carter
Barbara Karn
Wolfgang Kreyling
David Lai
Stephen Olin
Nancy Monteiro-Riviere
David Warheit
Hong Yang
ILSI Research Foundation/Risk Science Institute Nanomaterial Toxicity Screening Working Group
Environmental Protection Agency · USInternational Life Sciences Institute · USCentre for Inflammation Research · GBDuPont (United States) · USInstitute of Groundwater Ecology · DENational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health · USNorth Carolina State University · USProcter & Gamble (United States) · USRice University · USUniversity of Rochester · USUniversity of Rochester Medical Center · USWoodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid proliferation of many different engineered nanomaterials (defined as materials designed and produced to have structural features with at least one dimension of 100 nanometers or less) presents a dilemma to regulators regarding hazard identification. The International Life Sciences Institute Research Foundation/Risk Science Institute convened an expert working group to develop a screening strategy for the hazard identification of engineered nanomaterials. The working group report presents the elements of a screening strategy rather than a detailed testing protocol. Based on an evaluation of the limited data currently available, the report presents a broad data gathering strategy applicable to this early stage in the development of a risk assessment process for nanomaterials. Oral, dermal, inhalation, and injection routes of exposure are included recognizing that, depending on use patterns, exposure to nanomaterials may occur by any of these routes. The three key elements of the toxicity screening strategy are: Physicochemical Characteristics, In Vitro Assays (cellular and non-cellular), and In Vivo Assays. There is a strong likelihood that biological activity of nanoparticles will depend on physicochemical parameters not routinely considered in toxicity screening studies. Physicochemical properties that may be important in understanding the toxic effects of test materials include particle size and size distribution, agglomeration state, shape, crystal structure, chemical composition, surface area, surface chemistry, surface charge, and porosity. In vitro techniques allow specific biological and mechanistic pathways to be isolated and tested under controlled conditions, in ways that are not feasible in in vivo tests. Tests are suggested for portal-of-entry toxicity for lungs, skin, and the mucosal membranes, and target organ toxicity for endothelium, blood, spleen, liver, nervous system, heart, and kidney. Non-cellular assessment of nanoparticle durability, protein interactions, complement activation, and pro-oxidant activity is also considered. Tier 1 in vivo assays are proposed for pulmonary, oral, skin and injection exposures, and Tier 2 evaluations for pulmonary exposures are also proposed. Tier 1 evaluations include markers of inflammation, oxidant stress, and cell proliferation in portal-of-entry and selected remote organs and tissues. Tier 2 evaluations for pulmonary exposures could include deposition, translocation, and toxicokinetics and biopersistence studies; effects of multiple exposures; potential effects on the reproductive system, placenta, and fetus; alternative animal models; and mechanistic studies.

Identifiers

PMID16209704
PMCPMC1260029
OpenAlexW2140720810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.