Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33240770›Full record

ArticleAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2020

Multiparametric Profiling of Engineered Nanomaterials: Unmasking the Surface Coating Effect.

Audrey Gallud, Mathilde Delaval, Pia Kinaret, Veer Singh Marwah, Vittorio Fortino, Jimmy Ytterberg, Roman Zubarev, Tiina Skoog, Juha Kere, Manuel Correia and 12 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Safety Assessment of Graphene-Based Materials.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Understanding the immunological interactions of engineered nanomaterials: Role of the bio-corona.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Nextcast: A software suite to analyse and model toxicogenomics data.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Toxicogenomic Profiling of 28 Nanomaterials in Mouse Airways.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Multiparametric Profiling of Engineered Nanomaterials: Unmasking the Surface Coating Effect.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2020
    Article
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

22 authors at 10 institutions in 7 countries.

Audrey GalludInstitute of Environmental Medicine Karolinska Institutet Stockholm 171 77 Sweden.
Mathilde DelavalInstitute of Environmental Medicine Karolinska Institutet Stockholm 171 77 Sweden.
Pia KinaretFaculty of Medicine and Health Technology Tampere University Tampere 33720 Finland.
Veer Singh MarwahFaculty of Medicine and Health Technology Tampere University Tampere 33720 Finland.
Vittorio FortinoInstitute of Biomedicine University of Eastern Finland Kuopio 70211 Finland.
Jimmy YtterbergDepartment of Medical Biochemistry & Biophysics Karolinska Institutet Stockholm 171 77 Sweden.
Roman ZubarevDepartment of Medical Biochemistry & Biophysics Karolinska Institutet Stockholm 171 77 Sweden.
Tiina SkoogDepartment of Biosciences & Nutrition Karolinska Institutet Huddinge 141 83 Sweden.
Juha KereDepartment of Biosciences & Nutrition Karolinska Institutet Huddinge 141 83 Sweden.
Manuel CorreiaNational Food Institute Technical University of Denmark Kongens Lyngby 2800 Denmark.
Katrin LoeschnerNational Food Institute Technical University of Denmark Kongens Lyngby 2800 Denmark.
Zahraa Al-AhmadyFaculty of Biology Medicine & Health University of Manchester Manchester M20 4GJ UK.
Kostas KostarelosFaculty of Biology Medicine & Health University of Manchester Manchester M20 4GJ UK.
Jaime RuizISM UMR CNRS No. 5255 University of Bordeaux Talence 33 405 France.
Didier AstrucISM UMR CNRS No. 5255 University of Bordeaux Talence 33 405 France.
Marco MonopoliDepartment of Pharmaceutical & Medicinal Chemistry Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI) Dublin 2 Ireland.
Richard HandySchool of Biological & Marine Sciences University of Plymouth Plymouth PL4 8AA UK.
Sergio MoyaSoft Matter Nanotechnology Laboratory CIC biomaGUNE Donostia-San Sebastián 20014 Spain.
Kai SavolainenFinnish Institute of Occupational Health Helsinki 00032 Finland.
Harri AleniusInstitute of Environmental Medicine Karolinska Institutet Stockholm 171 77 Sweden.
Dario GrecoFaculty of Medicine and Health Technology Tampere University Tampere 33720 Finland.
Bengt FadeelInstitute of Environmental Medicine Karolinska Institutet Stockholm 171 77 Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5559-8482
Karolinska Institutet · SEUniversity of Helsinki · FICentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRTechnical University of Denmark · DKUniversity of Manchester · GBCIC biomaGUNE · ESFinnish Institute of Occupational Health · FIRoyal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IEUniversity of Eastern Finland · FIUniversity of Plymouth · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite considerable efforts, the properties that drive the cytotoxicity of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) remain poorly understood. Here, the authors inverstigate a panel of 31 ENMs with different core chemistries and a variety of surface modifications using conventional in vitro assays coupled with omics-based approaches. Cytotoxicity screening and multiplex-based cytokine profiling reveals a good concordance between primary human monocyte-derived macrophages and the human monocyte-like cell line THP-1. Proteomics analysis following a low-dose exposure of cells suggests a nonspecific stress response to ENMs, while microarray-based profiling reveals significant changes in gene expression as a function of both surface modification and core chemistry. Pathway analysis highlights that the ENMs with cationic surfaces that are shown to elicit cytotoxicity downregulated DNA replication and cell cycle responses, while inflammatory responses are upregulated. These findings are validated using cell-based assays. Notably, certain small, PEGylated ENMs are found to be noncytotoxic yet they induce transcriptional responses reminiscent of viruses. In sum, using a multiparametric approach, it is shown that surface chemistry is a key determinant of cellular responses to ENMs. The data also reveal that cytotoxicity, determined by conventional in vitro assays, does not necessarily correlate with transcriptional effects of ENMs.

Indexed as

immunotoxicitynanomaterialsnanotoxicologyproteomicstranscriptomics

Identifiers

PMID33240770
PMCPMC7675037
OpenAlexW3092977177

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.