4.5 Article

In vitro cytotoxicity and genotoxicity studies of titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles in Chinese hamster lung fibroblast cells

Journal

TOXICOLOGY IN VITRO
Volume 27, Issue 2, Pages 864-873

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tiv.2012.12.018

Keywords

Nanotoxicology; Surface modification; Cell death; Oxidative stress; DNA damage; Comet assay; Flow cytometry

Categories

Funding

  1. National Research Council of Canada (NRC) - Natural Sciences Engineering Research Council (NSERC)-Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC) Nanotechnology Initiative (NNBNI) research Grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There are increasing safety concerns about the development and abundant use of nanoparticles. The unique physical and chemical characteristics of titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles result in different chemical and biological activities compared to their larger micron-sized counterparts, and can subsequently play an important role in influencing toxicity. Therefore, our objective was to investigate the cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of commercially available TiO2 nanoparticles with respect to their selected physicochemical properties, as well as the role of surface coating of these nanoparticles. While all types of tested TiO2 samples decrease cell viability in a mass-based concentration- and size-dependent manner, the polyacrylate-coated nano-TiO2 product was only cytotoxic at higher concentrations. A similar pattern of response was observed for induction of apoptosis/necrosis, and no DNA damage was detected in the polyacrylate-coated nano-TiO2 model. Given the increasing production of TiO2 nanoparticles, toxicological studies should take into account the physiochemical properties of these nanoparticles that may help researchers to develop new nanoparticles with minimum toxicity. Crown Copyright (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available