ReviewJournal of nanobiotechnology2017
Role of omics techniques in the toxicity testing of nanoparticles.
Review in Journal of nanobiotechnology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 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
35 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Translational Paradox of Cancer Nanomedicine: Biological, Pharmacokinetic, and Manufacturing Barriers to Clinical Success.Biology · 2026Review
- Multi-Omics-Guided Design and Safety Engineering of Nucleic Acid Therapeutics: From Molecular Perturbation to Predictive Toxicology and Precision Translation.Chemical biology & drug design · 2026Review
- Toxicodynamics and Human Health Risks of Metal Nanoparticles: A Review of AI/ML-Based Predictive Nanotoxicology.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Green-Synthesized Nanomaterials from Edible and Medicinal Mushrooms: A Sustainable Strategy Against Antimicrobial Resistance.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- The nano-paradox: addressing nanotoxicity for sustainable agriculture, circular economy and SDGs.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2025Review
- Design Considerations for Organ-Selective Nanoparticles.ACS nano · 2025Review
- Comprehensive insights into mechanism of nanotoxicity, assessment methods and regulatory challenges of nanomedicines.Discover nano · 2024Review
- Upconverting photons at the molecular scale with lanthanide complexes.Chemical science · 2024Review
- Nanoparticles-induced potential toxicity on human health: Applications, toxicity mechanisms, and evaluation models.MedComm · 2023Review
- The toxicity of nanoparticles and their interaction with cells: anNanoscale advances · 2023Review
- Article
- Subchronic Graphene Exposure Reshapes Skin Cell Metabolism.Journal of proteome research · 2022Article
- Understanding Nanomaterial-Liver Interactions to Facilitate the Development of Safer Nanoapplications.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2022Review
- Review on Nanoparticles and Nanostructured Materials: Bioimaging, Biosensing, Drug Delivery, Tissue Engineering, Antimicrobial, and Agro-Food Applications.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Proteomics unite traditional toxicological assessment methods to evaluate the toxicity of iron oxide nanoparticles.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Toxicity of metal-based nanoparticles: Challenges in the nano era.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Particle Safety Assessment in Additive Manufacturing: From Exposure Risks to Advanced Toxicology Testing.Frontiers in toxicology · 2022Review
- reString: an open-source Python software to perform automatic functional enrichment retrieval, results aggregation and data visualization.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Analysis of Nanotoxicity with Integrated Omics and Mechanobiology.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Phospholipid-Gold Nanorods Induce Energy Crisis in MCF-7 Cells: Cytotoxicity Evaluation Using LC-MS-Based Metabolomics Approach.Biomolecules · 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Nanotechnology is regarded as a key technology of the twenty-first century. Despite the many advantages of nanotechnology it is also known that engineered nanoparticles (NPs) may cause adverse health effects in humans. Reports on toxic effects of NPs relay mainly on conventional (phenotypic) testing but studies of changes in epigenome, transcriptome, proteome, and metabolome induced by NPs have also been performed. NPs most relevant for human exposure in consumer, health and food products are metal, metal oxide and carbon-based NPs. They were also studied quite frequently with omics technologies and an overview of the study results can serve to answer the question if screening for established targets of nanotoxicity (e.g. cell death, proliferation, oxidative stress, and inflammation) is sufficient or if omics techniques are needed to reveal new targets. Regulated pathways identified by omics techniques were confirmed by phenotypic assays performed in the same study and comparison of particle types and cells by the same group indicated a more cell/organ-specific than particle specific regulation pattern. Between different studies moderate overlap of the regulated pathways was observed and cell-specific regulation is less obvious. The lack of standardization in particle exposure, in omics technologies, difficulties to translate mechanistic data to phenotypes and comparison with human in vivo data currently limit the use of these technologies in the prediction of toxic effects by NPs.
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.