Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36416020›Full record

ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology2022

Immunotoxicity of nanomaterials in health and disease: Current challenges and emerging approaches for identifying immune modifiers in susceptible populations.

Sabine Hofer, Norbert Hofstätter, Benjamin Punz, Ingrid Hasenkopf, Litty Johnson, Martin Himly

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Nanovaccines for lung cancer: Platforms, mechanistic insights, and translational challenges.Chinese medical journal pulmonary and critical care medicine · 2026
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. MnInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Safety of Zein Nanoparticles on Human Innate Immunity and Inflammation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    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

6 authors.

Sabine HoferDivision of Allergy & Immunology, Department of Biosciences & Medical Biology, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-4986-3539
Norbert HofstätterDivision of Allergy & Immunology, Department of Biosciences & Medical Biology, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-0207-0654
Benjamin PunzDivision of Allergy & Immunology, Department of Biosciences & Medical Biology, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-9662-4739
Ingrid HasenkopfDivision of Allergy & Immunology, Department of Biosciences & Medical Biology, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-3937-331X
Litty JohnsonDivision of Allergy & Immunology, Department of Biosciences & Medical Biology, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-1462-4167
Martin HimlyDivision of Allergy & Immunology, Department of Biosciences & Medical Biology, Paris Lodron University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-5416-085X

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF W01213
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanosafety assessment has experienced an intense era of research during the past decades driven by a vivid interest of regulators, industry, and society. Toxicological assays based on in vitro cellular models have undergone an evolution from experimentation using nanoparticulate systems on singular epithelial cell models to employing advanced complex models more realistically mimicking the respective body barriers for analyzing their capacity to alter the immune state of exposed individuals. During this phase, a number of lessons were learned. We have thus arrived at a state where the next chapters have to be opened, pursuing the following objectives: (1) to elucidate underlying mechanisms, (2) to address effects on vulnerable groups, (3) to test material mixtures, and (4) to use realistic doses on (5) sophisticated models. Moreover, data reproducibility has become a significant demand. In this context, we studied the emerging concept of adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) from the perspective of immune activation and modulation resulting in pro-inflammatory versus tolerogenic responses. When considering the interaction of nanomaterials with biological systems, protein corona formation represents the relevant molecular initiating event (e.g., by potential alterations of nanomaterial-adsorbed proteins). Using this as an example, we illustrate how integrated experimental-computational workflows combining in vitro assays with in silico models aid in data enrichment and upon comprehensive ontology-annotated (meta)data upload to online repositories assure FAIRness (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, Reusability). Such digital twinning may, in future, assist in early-stage decision-making during therapeutic development, and hence, promote safe-by-design innovation in nanomedicine. Moreover, it may, in combination with in silico-based exposure-relevant dose-finding, serve for risk monitoring in particularly loaded areas, for example, workplaces, taking into account pre-existing health conditions. This article is categorized under: Toxicology and Regulatory Issues in Nanomedicine > Toxicology of Nanomaterials.

Indexed as

Adverse Outcome PathwaysNanostructuresHumansNanomedicineReproducibility of ResultsResearch Designadverse outcome pathwayscomplex modelsdata FAIRnessdiseased statepre-existing conditions

Identifiers

PMID36416020
PMCPMC9787548

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.