ReviewParticle and fibre toxicology2018
Ingested engineered nanomaterials: state of science in nanotoxicity testing and future research needs.
Review in Particle and fibre toxicology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 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
66 citing papers in PubMed, 165 citations in OpenAlex.
- Antimicrobial Peptides: Classification, Mechanism, and Application in Plant Disease Resistance.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the cyto- and genotoxicity of two types of cellulose nanomaterials using human intestinal cells and in vitro digestion simulation.Archives of toxicology · 2025Article
- Nanoencapsulation of nutraceuticals: enhancing stability and bioavailability in functional foods.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
- Food contaminants: mechanisms of toxicity, computational assessment, and mitigation.Frontiers in toxicology · 2025Review
- A Comparative Review: Biological Safety and Sustainability of Metal Nanomaterials Without and with Machine Learning Assistance.Micromachines · 2024Review
- Cell-nanoparticle stickiness and dose delivery in a multi-model in silico platform: DosiGUI.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2024Article
- Effective density of inhaled environmental and engineered nanoparticles and its impact on the lung deposition and dosimetry.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2024Article
- Agglomeration Behavior and Fate of Food-Grade Titanium Dioxide in Human Gastrointestinal Digestion and in the Lysosomal Environment.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Intestinal Toxicity of Metal Nanoparticles: Silver Nanoparticles Disorder the Intestinal Immune Microenvironment.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2023Article
- Article
- Integrating structure annotation and machine learning approaches to develop graphene toxicity models.Carbon · 2023Article
- Insights into nanoparticles-induced neurotoxicity and cope up strategies.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Review
- In Vitro Evaluation of Anti-Rotaviral Activity and Intestinal Toxicity of a Phytotherapeutic Prototype ofViruses · 2022Article
- Article
- Toxicological Assessment of Cellulose Nanomaterials: Oral Exposure.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Antimicrobial, Antiviral, and In-Vitro Cytotoxicity and Mosquitocidal Activities ofJournal of functional biomaterials · 2022Article
- Roadmap of environmental health research on emerging contaminants: Inspiration from the studies on engineered nanomaterials.Eco-Environment & Health · 2022Review
- Changes of physico-chemical properties of nano-biomaterials by digestion fluids affect the physiological properties of epithelial intestinal cells and barrier models.Particle and fibre toxicology · 2022Article
- Safety and Toxicity Implications of Multifunctional Drug Delivery Nanocarriers on Reproductive SystemsFrontiers in toxicology · 2022Review
- Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Toxicity of Ingested Titanium Dioxide Nanomaterials.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2022Review
6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEngineered nanomaterials (ENM) are used extensively in food products to fulfill a number of roles, including enhancement of color and texture, for nutritional fortification, enhanced bioavailability, improved barrier properties of packaging, and enhanced food preservation. Safety assessment of ingested engineered nanomaterials (iENM) has gained interest in the nanotoxicology community in recent years. A variety of test systems and approaches have been used for such evaluations, with in vitro monoculture cell models being the most common test systems, owing to their low cost and ease-of-use. The goal of this review is to systematically assess the current state of science in toxicological testing of iENM, with particular emphasis on model test systems, their physiological relevance, methodological strengths and challenges, realistic doses (ranges and rates), and then to identify future research needs and priorities based on these assessments.
methodsExtensive searches were conducted in Google Scholar, PubMed and Web of Science to identify peer-reviewed literature on safety assessment of iENM over the last decade, using keywords such as "nanoparticle", "food", "toxicity", and combinations thereof. Relevant literature was assessed based on a set of criteria that included the relevance of nanomaterials tested; ENM physicochemical and morphological characterization; dispersion and dosimetry in an in vitro system; dose ranges employed, the rationale and dose realism; dissolution behavior of iENM; endpoints tested, and the main findings of each study. Observations were entered into an excel spreadsheet, transferred to Origin, from where summary statistics were calculated to assess patterns, trends, and research gaps.
resultsA total of 650 peer-reviewed publications were identified from 2007 to 2017, of which 39 were deemed relevant. Only 21% of the studies used food grade nanomaterials for testing; adequate physicochemical and morphological characterization was performed in 53% of the studies. All in vitro studies lacked dosimetry and 60% of them did not provide a rationale for the doses tested and their relevance. Only 12% of the studies attempted to consider the dissolution kinetics of nanomaterials. Moreover, only 1 study attempted to prepare and characterize standardized nanoparticle dispersions.
conclusionWe identified 5 clusters of factors deemed relevant to nanotoxicology of food-grade iENM: (i) using food-grade nanomaterials for toxicity testing; (ii) performing comprehensive physicochemical and morphological characterization of iENM in the dry state, (iii) establishing standard NP dispersions and their characterization in cell culture medium, (iv) employing realistic dose ranges and standardized in vitro dosimetry models, and (v) investigating dissolution kinetics and biotransformation behavior of iENM in synthetic media representative of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract fluids, including analyses in a fasted state and in the presence of a food matrix. We discussed how these factors, when not considered thoughtfully, could influence the results and generalizability of in vitro and in vivo testing. We conclude with a set of recommendations to guide future iENM toxicity studies and to develop/adopt more relevant in vitro model systems representative of in vivo animal and human iENM exposure scenarios.
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.