Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25964273›Full record

ArticleMutagenesis2015

Silver nanoparticles: correlating nanoparticle size and cellular uptake with genotoxicity.

Kimberly S Butler, David J Peeler, Brendan J Casey, Benita J Dair, Rosalie K Elespuru

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Mutagenesis, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 165 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Genotoxicity of nanoparticles evaluated using theJournal of environmental science and health. Part C, Toxicology and carcinogenesis · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. The Use of Metallic Nanoparticles in Wound Healing: New Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kimberly S ButlerU.S. Food and Drug Administration, Office of Medical Products and Tobacco, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Division of Biology, Chemistry, and Materials Science, 10933 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.
David J PeelerU.S. Food and Drug Administration, Office of Medical Products and Tobacco, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Division of Biology, Chemistry, and Materials Science, 10933 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.
Brendan J CaseyU.S. Food and Drug Administration, Office of Medical Products and Tobacco, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Division of Biology, Chemistry, and Materials Science, 10933 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.
Benita J DairU.S. Food and Drug Administration, Office of Medical Products and Tobacco, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Division of Biology, Chemistry, and Materials Science, 10933 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA.
Rosalie K ElespuruU.S. Food and Drug Administration, Office of Medical Products and Tobacco, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Division of Biology, Chemistry, and Materials Science, 10933 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20993, USA Rosalie.Elespuru@fda.hhs.gov.
Center for Devices and Radiological Health · USOffice of Science · USUnited States Food and Drug Administration · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The focus of this research was to develop a better understanding of the pertinent physico-chemical properties of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) that affect genotoxicity, specifically how cellular uptake influences a genotoxic cell response. The genotoxicity of AgNPs was assessed for three potential mechanisms: mutagenicity, clastogenicity and DNA strand-break-based DNA damage. Mutagenicity (reverse mutation assay) was assessed in five bacterial strains of Salmonella typhimurium and Echerichia coli, including TA102 that is sensitive to oxidative DNA damage. AgNPs of all sizes tested (10, 20, 50 and 100nm), along with silver nitrate (AgNO3), were negative for mutagenicity in bacteria. No AgNPs could be identified within the bacteria cells using transmission electron microscopy (TEM), indicating these bacteria lack the ability to actively uptake AgNPs 10nm or larger. Clastogenicity (flow cytometry-based micronucleus assay) and intermediate DNA damage (DNA strand breaks as measured in the Comet assay) were assessed in two mammalian white blood cell lines: Jurkat Clone E6-1 and THP-1. It was observed that micronucleus and Comet assay end points were inversely correlated with AgNP size, with smaller NPs inducing a more genotoxic response. TEM results indicated that AgNPs were confined within intracellular vesicles of mammalian cells and did not penetrate the nucleus. The genotoxicity test results and the effect of AgNO3 controls suggest that silver ions may be the primary, and perhaps only, cause of genotoxicity. Furthermore, since AgNO3 was not mutagenic in the gram-negative bacterial Ames strains tested, the lack of bacterial uptake of the AgNPs may not be the major reason for the lack of genotoxicity observed.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsCells, CulturedCell SurvivalComet AssayDNA DamageDNA RepairEscherichia coliEscherichia coli InfectionsHumansJurkat CellsMetal NanoparticlesMicronucleus TestsMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionMonocytesMutagenicity TestsMutagensAnti-Bacterial AgentsMutagensSilver

Identifiers

PMID25964273
PMCPMC4566096
OpenAlexW2262529437

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.