4.7 Article

BTEX in vitro exposure tool using human lung cells: Trips and gains

Journal

CHEMOSPHERE
Volume 128, Issue -, Pages 321-326

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.01.058

Keywords

In-vitro air exposure; BTEX; A549; Media exposure; Hanging drop

Funding

  1. CRCCARE [1-3-03-07/08]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cytotoxicity of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes (BTEX) to human lung cells was explored using three different exposure methods: Method 1 - in normal 96-well plates using DMSO as a carrier vehicle, we exposed (a) human lung carcinoma A549 cells, (b) A549 cells over-expressed with cytochrome P450 2E1 cells, and (c) normal lung fibroblast LL-24 cells to benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene individually and in a mixture which models car exhaust gases for between 1-88 h. We found that the order of the BTEX potency is benzene < toluene < ethylbenzene = m-xylene with acute BTEX toxicity to A549 approximate to ILL-24 > CYP2E1 over-expressed A549 cells. A significant difference was found between inter-assay responses for all 24 h exposures (P < 0.005) suggesting a poor assay repeatability. No sign of potency increase was found from 6 to 72 h exposures. Method 2 - Using sealed vials to expose A549 cells to benzene, toluene and ethylbenzene, we observed a twenty-fold increase in their cytotoxicity, but also with no time-course effect. Method 3 - Using air exposed hanging-drop cell culture, we were able to see both an increase of demonstration of toxicity and a time-course effect from 1 to 12 h exposure. We conclude that exposing cells in sealed and unsealed media using DMSO as a carrier vehicle was not suitable for BTEX exposure studies. Hanging-drop air exposure has more potential. It should be noted that if there are any changes in their exposure matrixes, its exposure mass distribution in cells could differ. (C) 2015 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available