ReviewCritical reviews in toxicology2017
Weight of evidence analysis for assessing the genotoxic potential of carbon nanotubes.
Review in Critical reviews in toxicology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dose-Response Relationships for Lung Tumor and Pleural Mesothelioma Induction by Repetitive Intratracheal Instillation of a Multiwalled Carbon Nanotube, MWCNT-7, in Rats: Comparison with Inhalation Carcinogenicity Based on Lung Burden.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Diffuse peritoneal mesothelioma presenting with the appearance of mesenteric panniculitis: A case report.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- Critical values for dimensional parameters of mesotheliomagenic mineral fibers: evidence from the dimensions and rigidity of MWCNT.Frontiers in toxicology · 2025Article
- Exposure of Rats to Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes: Correlation of Inhalation Exposure to Lung Burden, Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid Findings, and Lung Morphology.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Grouping MWCNTs based on their similar potential to cause pulmonary hazard after inhalation: a case-study.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2022Article
- Two-year intermittent exposure of a multiwalled carbon nanotube by intratracheal instillation induces lung tumors and pleural mesotheliomas in F344 rats.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2022Article
- Genotoxicity assessment of cellulose nanofibrils using a standard battery ofToxicology reports · 2022Article
- In vitro-in vivo correlations of pulmonary inflammogenicity and genotoxicity of MWCNT.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2021Article
- The low doses of SWCNTs affect the expression of proliferation and apoptosis related genes in normal human astrocytes.Current research in toxicology · 2021Article
- Physicochemical characterization and genotoxicity of the broad class of carbon nanotubes and nanofibers used or produced in U.S. facilities.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2020Article
- The Comet Assay as a Tool to Detect the Genotoxic Potential of Nanomaterials.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Vasomotor function in rat arteries after ex vivo and intragastric exposure to food-grade titanium dioxide and vegetable carbon particles.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum.2017
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Carbon nanotube (CNT) is a nanomaterial that has received interest because of its high-tensile strength and low weight. Although CNTs differ substantially in physico-chemical properties, they share high aspect ratio which resembles that of asbestos and other fibers causing lung cancer and mesothelioma. One type of multi-walled CNTs (i.e. MWCNT-7) has been classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans by IARC (Group 2B) based on experimental animal data, whereas other types of MWCNTs and single-walled CNTs (SWCNT) could not be classified due to lack of data from epidemiologic studies and insufficient mechanistic evidence. Damage to DNA is considered to be a key mechanistic step in the development of fiber-induced cancer. Thus, the genotoxic potential can be a cornerstone in the evaluation of hazards of CNTs. The present study used a weight of evidence (WoE) analysis to evaluate the genotoxicity of different types of CNTs. Genotoxicity endpoints close to cancer (mutations and chromosome aberrations) and animal models had highest weight in the WoE analysis. Eight CNT materials out of 130, which had been assessed in several studies, were evaluated in the WoE analysis. The results demonstrated that MWCNT-7 has strongest WoE for a genotoxic hazard among the MWCNTs. Two types of SWCNTs have a similar WoE for genotoxicity as MWCNT-7. Several reference materials from the Joint Research Centre have less WoE for genotoxicity. The WoE analysis demonstrates a difference in genotoxicity for CNTs, but further research is required to unravel the physico-chemical characteristics that govern the differences in genotoxic hazard.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28937307What 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.