Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25266609›Full record

ArticleParticle and fibre toxicology2014

Comparative iron oxide nanoparticle cellular dosimetry and response in mice by the inhalation and liquid cell culture exposure routes.

Justin G Teeguarden, Vladimir B Mikheev, Kevin R Minard, William C Forsythe, Wei Wang, Gaurav Sharma, Norman Karin, Susan C Tilton, Katrina M Waters, Bahman Asgharian and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Particle and fibre toxicology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Predicting nanomaterials pulmonary toxicity in animals by cell culture models: Achievements and perspectives.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology · 2022
    Review
  6. Approach towardEnvironmental science & technology · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Dry Generation of CeONanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Justin G Teeguarden
Vladimir B Mikheev
Kevin R Minard
William C Forsythe
Wei Wang
Gaurav Sharma
Norman Karin
Susan C Tilton
Katrina M Waters
Bahman Asgharian
Owen R Price
Joel G Pounds
Brian D Thrall
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory · USBattelle · USApplied Research Associates (United States) · USOak Ridge National Laboratory · USRoswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center · US

Funding

Project 3: Dosimetry and Structure-Activity Relationships for Nanomaterial Risk AU19ES019544 · NIEHS · BATTELLE PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORIES · PI THRALL, BRIAN · 2010 to 2014
$6.0M
NIEHS NIH HHS U19 ES019544NIEHS NIH HHS U19-ES019544
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundToxicity testing the rapidly growing number of nanomaterials requires large scale use of in vitro systems under the presumption that these systems are sufficiently predictive or descriptive of responses in in vivo systems for effective use in hazard ranking. We hypothesized that improved relationships between in vitro and in vivo models of experimental toxicology for nanomaterials would result from placing response data in vitro and in vivo on the same dose scale, the amount of material associated with cells.

methodsBalb/c mice were exposed nose-only to an aerosol (68.6 nm CMD, 19.9 mg/m(3), 4 hours) generated from of 12.8 nm superparamagnetic iron oxide particles (SPIO). Target cell doses were calculated, histological evaluations conducted, and biomarkers of response were identified by global transcriptomics. Representative murine epithelial and macrophage cell types were exposed in vitro to the same material in liquid suspension for four hours and levels of nanoparticle regulated cytokine transcripts identified in vivo were quantified as a function of measured nanoparticle cellular dose.

resultsTarget tissue doses of 0.009-0.4 μg SPIO/cm(2) in lung led to an inflammatory response in the alveolar region characterized by interstitial inflammation and macrophage infiltration. In vitro, higher target tissue doses of ~1.2-4 μg SPIO/ cm(2) of cells were required to induce transcriptional regulation of markers of inflammation, CXCL2 & CCL3, in C10 lung epithelial cells. Estimated in vivo macrophage SPIO nanoparticle doses ranged from 1-100 pg/cell, and induction of inflammatory markers was observed in vitro in macrophages at doses of 8-35 pg/cell.

conclusionsApplication of target tissue dosimetry revealed good correspondence between target cell doses triggering inflammatory processes in vitro and in vivo in the alveolar macrophage population, but not in the epithelial cells of the alveolar region. These findings demonstrate the potential for target tissue dosimetry to enable the more quantitative comparison of in vitro and in vivo systems and advance their use for hazard assessment and extrapolation to humans. The mildly inflammogentic cellular doses experienced by mice were similar to those calculated for humans exposed to the same material at the existing permissible exposure limit of 10 mg/m(3) iron oxide (as Fe).

Indexed as

AerosolsAnimalsCell LineCytokinesDose-Response Relationship, DrugEpithelial CellsGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression RegulationInflammation MediatorsInhalation ExposureLungMacrophagesMagnetite NanoparticlesMaleMice, Inbred BALB CMice, Inbred C57BLAerosolsCytokinesInflammation MediatorsMagnetite NanoparticlesRNA, Messenger

Identifiers

PMID25266609
PMCPMC4200214
OpenAlexW2103457389

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.