ArticleParticle and fibre toxicology2022
Grouping of orally ingested silica nanomaterials via use of an integrated approach to testing and assessment to streamline risk assessment.
Article in Particle and fibre toxicology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral Toxicity Study of Silicon Dioxide Nanoparticles on Fertility and Early Embryonic Development in Mice.International journal of nanomedicine · 2025Article
- Critical aspects in dissolution testing of nanomaterials in the oro-gastrointestinal tract: the relevance of juice composition for hazard identification and grouping.Nanoscale advances · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNanomaterials can exist in different nanoforms (NFs). Their grouping may be supported by the formulation of hypotheses which can be interrogated via integrated approaches to testing and assessment (IATA). IATAs are decision trees that guide the user through tiered testing strategies (TTS) to collect the required evidence needed to accept or reject a grouping hypothesis. In the present paper, we investigated the applicability of IATAs for ingested NFs using a case study that includes different silicon dioxide, SiO
resultsThe measurement of the dissolution rate of the silica NFs in the oro-gastrointestinal tract and in the lysosome identified them as gradually dissolving and biopersistent NFs. For the local toxicity to intestinal epithelium (e.g. cytotoxicity, membrane integrity and inflammation), the biological results of the gastrointestinal tract models indicate that all of the silica NFs were similar with respect to the lack of local toxicity and, therefore, belong to the same group; in vivo data (although limited) confirmed the lack of local toxicity of NFs. For systemic toxicity, Tier 1 data did not identify similarity across the NFs, with results across different decision nodes being inconsistent in providing homogeneous group(s). Moreover, the available Tier 3 in vivo data were also insufficient to support decisions based upon the obtained in vitro results and relating to the toxicity of the tested NFs.
conclusionsThe information generated by the tested oral IATAs can be effectively used for similarity assessment to support a grouping decision upon the application of a hypothesis related to toxicity in the gastrointestinal tract. The IATAs facilitated a structured data analysis and, by means of the expert's interpretation, supported read-across with the available in vivo data. The IATAs also supported the users in decision making, for example, reducing the testing when the grouping was well supported by the evidence and/or moving forward to advanced testing (e.g., the use of more suitable cellular models or chronic exposure) to improve the confidence level of the data and obtain more focused information.
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.