ReviewNanoscale2011
No time to lose--high throughput screening to assess nanomaterial safety.
Review in Nanoscale, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
42 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identification of a Gene Signature Predicting (Nano)Particle-Induced Adverse Lung Outcome in Rats.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Hepatotoxic and Neurotoxic Potential of Iron Oxide Nanoparticles in Wistar Rats: a Biochemical and Ultrastructural Study.Biological trace element research · 2022Article
- Microenvironmental Behaviour of Nanotheranostic Systems for Controlled Oxidative Stress and Cancer Treatment.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- A General Small-Angle X-ray Scattering-Based Screening Protocol for Studying Physical Stability of Protein Formulations.Pharmaceutics · 2021Article
- Advanced biomedical hydrogels: molecular architecture and its impact on medical applications.Regenerative biomaterials · 2021Review
- Label-free cell based impedance measurements of ZnO nanoparticles-human lung cell interaction: a comparison with MTT, NR, Trypan blue and cloning efficiency assays.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2021Article
- The pharmacology of plant virus nanoparticles.Virology · 2021Review
- Genotoxicity of Nanomaterials: Advanced In Vitro Models and High Throughput Methods for Human Hazard Assessment-A Review.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Label-free impedance flow cytometry for nanotoxicity screening.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Pulmonary toxicity of inhaled nano-sized cerium oxide aerosols in Sprague-Dawley rats.Nanotoxicology · 2019Article
- Engineering, on-demand manufacturing, and scaling-up of polymeric nanocapsules.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2019Article
- The Right Stuff: On the Future of Nanotoxicology.Frontiers in toxicology · 2019Article
- Differential Sensitivity of Wetland-Derived Nitrogen Cycling Microorganisms to Copper Nanoparticles.ACS sustainable chemistry & engineering · 2018Article
- Implementation of Safe-by-Design for Nanomaterial Development and Safe Innovation: Why We Need a Comprehensive Approach.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- Promise and peril in nanomedicine: the challenges and needs for integrated systems biology approaches to define health risk.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology · 2018Review
- Cytotoxic, Apoptotic and Genotoxic Effects of Lipid-Based and Polymeric Nano Micelles, an In Vitro Evaluation.Toxics · 2017Article
- Role of omics techniques in the toxicity testing of nanoparticles.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2017Review
- Emerging metrology for high-throughput nanomaterial genotoxicology.Mutagenesis · 2017Review
- High throughput toxicity screening and intracellular detection of nanomaterials.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology · 2017Review
- An Integrated Data-Driven Strategy for Safe-by-Design Nanoparticles: The FP7 MODERN Project.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nanomaterials hold great promise for medical, technological and economical benefits. Knowledge concerning the toxicological properties of these novel materials is typically lacking. At the same time, it is becoming evident that some nanomaterials could have a toxic potential in humans and the environment. Animal based systems lack the needed capacity to cope with the abundance of novel nanomaterials being produced, and thus we have to employ in vitro methods with high throughput to manage the rush logistically and use high content readouts wherever needed in order to gain more depth of information. Towards this end, high throughput screening (HTS) and high content screening (HCS) approaches can be used to speed up the safety analysis on a scale that commensurate with the rate of expansion of new materials and new properties. The insights gained from HTS/HCS should aid in our understanding of the tenets of nanomaterial hazard at biological level as well as assist the development of safe-by-design approaches. This review aims to provide a comprehensive introduction to the HTS/HCS methodology employed for safety assessment of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs), including data analysis and prediction of potentially hazardous material properties. Given the current pace of nanomaterial development, HTS/HCS is a potentially effective means of keeping up with the rapid progress in this field--we have literally no time to lose.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.