ArticleParticle and fibre toxicology2018
Grouping of nanomaterials to read-across hazard endpoints: from data collection to assessment of the grouping hypothesis by application of chemoinformatic techniques.
Article 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 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.
- A roadmap towards safe and sustainable by design nanotechnology: Implementation for nano-silver-based antimicrobial textile coatings production by ASINA project.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Article
- Differentially Induced Autophagy by Engineered Nanomaterial Treatment Has an Impact on Cellular Homeostasis and Cytotoxicity.Nano letters · 2024Article
- Biomolecular Adsorption on Nanomaterials: Combining Molecular Simulations with Machine Learning.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2024Article
- Grouping strategies for assessing and managing persistent and mobile substances.Environmental sciences Europe · 2024Review
- Experimental and Computational Nanotoxicology-Complementary Approaches for Nanomaterial Hazard Assessment.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- FAIRification of nanosafety data to improve applicability of (Q)SAR approaches: A case study onComputational toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021Article
- Nanotechnology and artificial intelligence to enable sustainable and precision agriculture.Nature plants · 2021Review
- Towards FAIR nanosafety data.Nature nanotechnology · 2021Article
- Potential Role of Soluble Metal Impurities in the Acute Lung Inflammogenicity of Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Practices and Trends of Machine Learning Application in Nanotoxicology.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Read-across predictions of nanoparticle hazard endpoints: a mathematical optimization approach.Nanoscale advances · 2019Article
- Developing OECD test guidelines for regulatory testing of nanomaterials to ensure mutual acceptance of test data.Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn increasing number of manufactured nanomaterials (NMs) are being used in industrial products and need to be registered under the REACH legislation. The hazard characterisation of all these forms is not only technically challenging but resource and time demanding. The use of non-testing strategies like read-across is deemed essential to assure the assessment of all NMs in due time and at lower cost. The fact that read-across is based on the structural similarity of substances represents an additional difficulty for NMs as in general their structure is not unequivocally defined. In such a scenario, the identification of physicochemical properties affecting the hazard potential of NMs is crucial to define a grouping hypothesis and predict the toxicological hazards of similar NMs. In order to promote the read-across of NMs, ECHA has recently published "Recommendations for nanomaterials applicable to the guidance on QSARs and Grouping", but no practical examples were provided in the document. Due to the lack of publicly available data and the inherent difficulties of reading-across NMs, only a few examples of read-across of NMs can be found in the literature. This manuscript presents the first case study of the practical process of grouping and read-across of NMs following the workflow proposed by ECHA.
methodsThe workflow proposed by ECHA was used and slightly modified to present the read-across case study. The Read-Across Assessment Framework (RAAF) was used to evaluate the uncertainties of a read-across within NMs. Chemoinformatic techniques were used to support the grouping hypothesis and identify key physicochemical properties.
resultsA dataset of 6 nanoforms of TiO
conclusionThe workflow proposed by ECHA to read-across NMs was applied successfully. Chemoinformatic techniques were shown to provide key evidence for the assessment of the grouping hypothesis and the definition of similar NMs. The RAAF was found to be applicable to NMs.
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.