Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38727304›Full record

ReviewCells2024

Important Factors Affecting Induction of Cell Death, Oxidative Stress and DNA Damage by Nano- and Microplastic Particles In Vitro.

Kamil Płuciennik, Paulina Sicińska, Weronika Misztal, Bożena Bukowska

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cells, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Microplastics, nanoplastics and liver disease: an emerging health concern?Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. A One Health Perspective on Cancer: A Narrative Review.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Micro/nanoplastics and eye health: a review.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

Kamil PłuciennikUniversity of Lodz, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, Department of Biophysics of Environmental Pollution, Pomorska 141/143, 90-236 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-4866-7464
Paulina SicińskaUniversity of Lodz, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, Department of Biophysics of Environmental Pollution, Pomorska 141/143, 90-236 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-6139-2613
Weronika MisztalUniversity of Lodz, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, Department of Biophysics of Environmental Pollution, Pomorska 141/143, 90-236 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0009-0003-2278-6913
Bożena BukowskaUniversity of Lodz, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, Department of Biophysics of Environmental Pollution, Pomorska 141/143, 90-236 Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-3044-2953

Funding

University of Łódź B2011000000191.01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We have described the influence of selected factors that increase the toxicity of nanoplastics (NPs) and microplastics (MPs) with regard to cell viability, various types of cell death, reactive oxygen species (ROS) induction, and genotoxicity. These factors include plastic particle size (NPs/MPs), zeta potential, exposure time, concentration, functionalization, and the influence of environmental factors and cell type. Studies have unequivocally shown that smaller plastic particles are more cytotoxic, penetrate cells more easily, increase ROS formation, and induce oxidative damage to proteins, lipids, and DNA. The toxic effects also increase with concentration and incubation time. NPs with positive zeta potential are also more toxic than those with a negative zeta potential because the cells are negatively charged, inducing stronger interactions. The deleterious effects of NPs and MPs are increased by functionalization with anionic or carboxyl groups, due to greater interaction with cell membrane components. Cationic NPs/MPs are particularly toxic due to their greater cellular uptake and/or their effects on cells and lysosomal membranes. The effects of polystyrene (PS) vary from one cell type to another, and normal cells are more sensitive to NPs than cancerous ones. The toxicity of NPs/MPs can be enhanced by environmental factors, including UV radiation, as they cause the particles to shrink and change their shape, which is a particularly important consideration when working with environmentally-changed NPs/MPs. In summary, the cytotoxicity, oxidative properties, and genotoxicity of plastic particles depends on their concentration, duration of action, and cell type. Also, NPs/MPs with a smaller diameter and positive zeta potential, and those exposed to UV and functionalized with amino groups, demonstrate higher toxicity than larger, non-functionalized and environmentally-unchanged particles with a negative zeta potential.

Indexed as

Cell DeathDNA DamageMicroplasticsNanoparticlesOxidative StressAnimalsHumansParticle SizeReactive Oxygen SpeciesMicroplasticsReactive Oxygen SpeciescytotoxicDNA damagefunctionalizationoxidative stressUV radiationzeta potential

Identifiers

PMID38727304
PMCPMC11083305

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.