Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32066787›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Interactions of graphene oxide and graphene nanoplatelets with the in vitro Caco-2/HT29 model of intestinal barrier.

Josefa Domenech, Alba Hernández, Esref Demir, Ricard Marcos, Constanza Cortés

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Immunotoxicity of Carbon-Based Nanomaterials, Starring Phagocytes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  12. Genotoxicity of Graphene-Based Materials.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Toxicology reports · 2022
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
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.

Josefa DomenechGrup de Mutagènesi, Departament de Genètica i de Microbiologia, Facultat de Biociències, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.
Alba HernándezGrup de Mutagènesi, Departament de Genètica i de Microbiologia, Facultat de Biociències, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.
Esref DemirAntalya Bilim University, College of Engineering, Department of Material Science and Nanotechnology Engineering, 07190-Dosemealti, Antalya, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2146-7385
Ricard MarcosGrup de Mutagènesi, Departament de Genètica i de Microbiologia, Facultat de Biociències, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain. ricard.marcos@uab.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7891-357X
Constanza CortésGrup de Mutagènesi, Departament de Genètica i de Microbiologia, Facultat de Biociències, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain. constanza.cortes@uab.es.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Carbon-based nanomaterials are being increasingly used, demanding strong information to support their safety in terms of human health. As ingestion is one of the most important exposure routes in humans, we have determined their potential risk by using an in vitro model simulating the human intestinal barrier and evaluated the effects of both graphene oxide (GO) and graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs). A coculture of differentiated Caco-2/HT29 cells presenting inherent intestinal epithelium characteristics (i.e. mucus secretion, brush border, tight junctions, etc.) were treated with GO or GNPs for 24 h. Different endpoints such as viability, membrane integrity, NPs localization, cytokines secretion, and genotoxic damage were evaluated to have a wide view of their potentially harmful effects. No cytotoxic effects were observed in the cells that constitute the barrier model. In the same way, no adverse effects were detected neither in the integrity of the barrier (TEER) nor in its permeability (LY). Nevertheless, a different bio-adhesion and biodistribution behavior was observed for GO and GNPs by confocal microscopy analysis, with a more relevant uptake of GNPs. No oxidative damage induction was detected, either by the DCFH-DA assay or the FPG enzyme in the comet assay. Conversely, both GO and GNPs were able to induce DNA breaks, as observed in the comet assay. Finally, low levels of anti-inflammatory cytokines were detected, suggesting a weak anti-inflammatory response. Our results show the moderate/severe risk posed by GO/GNPs exposures, given the observed genotoxic effects, suggesting that more extensive genotoxic evaluations must be done to properly assess the genotoxic hazard of these nanomaterials.

Indexed as

Biological TransportCaco-2 CellsCell DifferentiationCell SurvivalDNA DamageGraphiteHT29 CellsHumansIntestinal MucosaIntestinesNanoparticlesNanostructuresPermeabilityTight Junctionsgraphene oxideGraphite

Identifiers

PMID32066787
PMCPMC7026044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.