4.6 Review

Nanomedicine and nanotoxicology: two sides of the same coin

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.nano.2005.10.003

Keywords

Nanotoxicology; Macrophages; Carbon nanotubes; Inflammatory response; Phosphatidylserine

Funding

  1. NIOSH [OH008282]
  2. NORA [92700Y]
  3. American Heart Association [0535365N]
  4. Laerdal Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Current advances in nanotechnology have led to the development of the new field of nanomedicine, which includes many applications of nanomaterials and nanodevices for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The same unique physical and chemical properties that make nanomaterials so attractive may be associated with their potentially calamitous effects on cells and tissues. Our recent study demonstrated that aspiration of single-walled carbon nanotubes elicited an unusual inflammatory response in the lungs of exposed mice with a very early switch from the acute inflammatory phase to fibrogenic events resulting in pulmonary deposition of collagen and elastin. This was accompanied by a characteristic change in the production and release of proinflammatory to anti-inflammatory profibrogenic cytokines, decline in pulmonary function, and enhanced susceptibility to infection. Chemically unmodified (nonfunctionalized) carbon nanotubes are not effectively recognized by macrophages. Functionalization of nanotubes results in their increased recognition by macrophages and is thus used for the delivery of nanoparticles to macrophages and other immune cells to improve the quality of diagnostic and imaging techniques as well as for enhancement of the therapeutic effectiveness of drugs. These observations on differences in recognition of nanoparticles by macrophages have important implications in the relationship between the potentially toxic health effects of nanomaterials and their applications in the field of nanomedicine. (C) 2005 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available