ArticleToxicology letters2025
Differentiating the in vitro toxicity of solid-surface composite dust: A comparison of material components and abrasive particles.
Article in Toxicology letters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWorkers fabricating solid-surface composite (SSC) materials like Corian® are exposed to airborne particulate matter (PM) containing aluminum trihydrate (ATH) and potentially abrasive particles from sanding tools, leading to concerns about respiratory health effects like pulmonary fibrosis. However, the relative toxicological contributions of the SSC material versus the sandpaper abrasives remain unclear.
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the in vitro cellular responses induced by respirable dust generated from sanding SSC with different commercial sandpapers (aluminum oxide [Al2O3], ceramic, silicon carbide [SiC]) to the responses elicited by ATH and corresponding abrasive analogue particles.
methodsRespirable dust (PM with an aerodynamic diameter less than 5 µm) was generated from sanding Corian® using the three sandpaper types via a fluidized bed generator coupled with a cyclone separator. Human monocytic THP-1 cells, differentiated into macrophage-like cells, were exposed for 48 h to suspensions of these SSC dusts, ATH, or Al2O3, ceramic, and SiC abrasive analogue particles (10 µg/well). Cytotoxicity (LDH release), apoptosis (Caspase 3/7 activity), necrosis (propidium iodide uptake), cell cycle distribution, and nuclear morphology (including mono-, bi-, multi-, and micronucleation) and the Nuclear Division Index were assessed.
resultsExposure to SSC dusts generated with any sandpaper type, as well as ATH, resulted in significant increases in apoptosis compared to controls. However, these exposures did not cause significant LDH release or alterations in cell cycle progression or mitotic indices. Conversely, the Al2O3, ceramic, and SiC abrasive analogue particles induced significant disruptions in cell cycle (S phase population reduction) and mitosis (increased multinucleation, micronucleation, and NDI), alongside apoptosis (Al2O3, SiC) or necrosis (ceramic, SiC), but also caused minimal LDH release.
conclusionUnder these in vitro conditions, the apoptotic response to respirable SSC sanding dust appears primarily driven by components inherent to the SSC material itself, consistent with the effects of ATH. This response profile was distinct from the cell cycle arrest and mitotic disruption prominently caused by the abrasive analogue particles. These findings suggest the intrinsic properties of SSC material components are key drivers of initial macrophage responses in vitro, differing significantly from the effects of the abrasive materials alone.
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.