ArticleParticle and fibre toxicology2011
Problems and challenges in the development and validation of human cell-based assays to determine nanoparticle-induced immunomodulatory effects.
Article in Particle and fibre toxicology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 200 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review on the Hazard Assessment of Amorphous Silica Based on the Literature From 2013 to 2018.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- Advances in Cytotoxicity Testing: From In Vitro Assays to In Silico Models.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Combining exercise and nanoparticle-based therapies: a review of physiological synergies and pharmacological potential.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Advancing Cancer Immunotherapy Using Lipid Nanoparticle-Based Approaches.International journal of nanomedicine · 2025Review
- An Outlook on Platinum-Based Active Ingredients for Dermatologic and Skincare Applications.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Toxicity evaluation of silica nanoparticles for delivery applications.Drug delivery and translational research · 2023Review
- Nanoceria as Safe Contrast Agents for X-ray CT Imaging.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Advanced Respiratory Models for Hazard Assessment of Nanomaterials-Performance of Mono-, Co- and Tricultures.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The Relevance of Physico-Chemical Properties and Protein Corona for Evaluation of Nanoparticles Immunotoxicity-In Vitro Correlation Analysis on THP-1 Macrophages.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Towards health-based nano reference values (HNRVs) for occupational exposure: Recommendations from an expert panel.NanoImpact · 2022Article
- The mechanism of cell death induced by silver nanoparticles is distinct from silver cations.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2021Article
- Carbon-Based Nanomaterials Increase Reactivity of Primary Monocytes towards Various Bacteria and Modulate Their Differentiation into Macrophages.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- In Vitro Assessment of the Genotoxic Potential of Pristine Graphene Platelets.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Cross-Species Comparisons of Nanoparticle Interactions with Innate Immune Systems: A Methodological Review.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- The Use of Alternative Strategies for Enhanced Nanoparticle Delivery to Solid Tumors.Chemical reviews · 2021Review
- Interaction between Macrophages and Nanoparticles: In Vitro 3D Cultures for the Realistic Assessment of Inflammatory Activation and Modulation of Innate Memory.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A Step-by-Step Approach to Improve Clinical Translation of Liposome-Based Nanomaterials, a Focus on Innate Immune and Inflammatory Responses.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- SERS Sensing of Bacterial Endotoxin on Gold Nanoparticles.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Article
- Innate Memory Reprogramming by Gold Nanoparticles Depends on the Microbial Agents That Induce Memory.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 8 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith the increasing use of nanomaterials, the need for methods and assays to examine their immunosafety is becoming urgent, in particular for nanomaterials that are deliberately administered to human subjects (as in the case of nanomedicines). To obtain reliable results, standardised in vitro immunotoxicological tests should be used to determine the effects of engineered nanoparticles on human immune responses. However, before assays can be standardised, it is important that suitable methods are established and validated.
resultsIn a collaborative work between European laboratories, existing immunological and toxicological in vitro assays were tested and compared for their suitability to test effects of nanoparticles on immune responses. The prototypical nanoparticles used were metal (oxide) particles, either custom-generated by wet synthesis or commercially available as powders. Several problems and challenges were encountered during assay validation, ranging from particle agglomeration in biological media and optical interference with assay systems, to chemical immunotoxicity of solvents and contamination with endotoxin.
conclusionThe problems that were encountered in the immunological assay systems used in this study, such as chemical or endotoxin contamination and optical interference caused by the dense material, significantly affected the data obtained. These problems have to be solved to enable the development of reliable assays for the assessment of nano-immunosafety.
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.