ReviewJournal of cancer prevention2021
Nanoparticles: Weighing the Pros and Cons from an Eco-genotoxicological Perspective.
Review in Journal of cancer prevention, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Regulating nanomedicines: challenges, opportunities, and the path forward.Nanomedicine (London, England) · 2025Review
- Potential impacts of nanoparticles integration on micropropagation efficiency: current achievements and prospects.Frontiers in plant science · 2025Review
- A One-Step Approach for a Durable and Highly Hydrophobic Coating for Flax Fabrics for Self-Cleaning Application.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Alleviation of calcium hydroxide nanoparticles induced genotoxicity and gastritis by coadministration of calcium titanate and yttrium oxide nanoparticles in mice.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Epigenetic Regulation in Exposome-Induced Tumorigenesis: Emerging Roles of ncRNAs.Biomolecules · 2022Review
- Galleria mellonella as a Simple Yet Reliable In Vivo Model for Nanotoxicology: Techniques and Applications.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnologyReview
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 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The exponential growth of nanotechnology and the industrial production have raised concerns over its impact on human and environmental health and safety (EHS). Although there has been substantial progress in the assessment of pristine nanoparticle toxicities, their EHS impacts require greater clarification. In this review, we discuss studies that have assessed nanoparticle eco-genotoxicity in different test systems and their fate in the environment as well as the considerable confounding factors that may complicate the results. We highlight key mechanisms of nanoparticle-mediated genotoxicity. Then we discuss the reliability of endpoint assays, such as the comet assay, the most favored assessment technique because of its versatility to measure low levels of DNA strand breakage, and the micronucleus assay, which is complementary to the former because of its greater ability to detect chromosomal DNA fragmentation. We also address the current recommendations on experimental design, including environmentally relevant concentrations and suitable exposure duration to avoid false-positive or -negative results. The genotoxicity of nanoparticles depends on their physicochemical features and the presence of co-pollutants. Thus, the effect of environmental processes (e.g., aggregation and agglomeration, adsorption, and transformation of nanoparticles) would account for when determining the actual genotoxicity relevant to environmental systems, and assay procedures must be standardized. Indeed, the engineered nanoparticles offer potential applications in different fields including biomedicine, environment, agriculture, and industry. Toxicological pathways and the potential risk factors related to genotoxic responses in biological organisms and environments need to be clarified before appropriate and sustainable applications of nanoparticles can be established.
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.