4.4 Article

Nanoparticle-assay marker interaction: effects on nanotoxicity assessment

Journal

JOURNAL OF NANOPARTICLE RESEARCH
Volume 17, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11051-014-2841-0

Keywords

Nanomaterial; LDH assay; TNF- alpha; Toxicology; Cytotoxicity; Environmental and health effects

Funding

  1. Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) [102 129 0098]
  2. Singapore Centre on Environmental Life Sciences Engineering (SCELSE) [M4330001.C70.703012]
  3. NTU-National Healthcare Group (NTU-NHG) [ARG/14012]
  4. School of Materials Science and Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore [M020070110]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Protein-based cytotoxicity assays such as lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) are commonly used in cytotoxic evaluation of nanoparticles (NPs) despite numerous reports on possible interactions with protein markers in these assays that can confound the results obtained. In this study, conventional cytotoxicity assays where assay markers may (LDH and TNF- alpha) or may not (PicoGreen and WST-8) come into contact with NPs were used to evaluate the cytotoxicity of NPs. The findings revealed selective interactions between negatively charged protein assay markers (LDH and TNF-alpha) and positively charged ZnO NPs under abiotic conditions. The adsorption and interaction with these protein assay markers were strongly influenced by surface charge, concentration, and specific surface area of the NPs, thereby resulting in less than accurate cytotoxic measurements, as observed from actual cell viability measurements. An improved protocol for LDH assay was, therefore, proposed and validated by eliminating any effects associated with protein-particle interactions. In view of this, additional measures and precautions should be taken when evaluating cytotoxicity of NPs with standard protein-based assays, particularly when they are of opposite charges.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available