4.4 Article

Case studies putting the decision-making framework for the grouping and testing of nanomaterials (DF4nanoGrouping) into practice

期刊

REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY
卷 76, 期 -, 页码 234-261

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.11.020

关键词

Carbonaceous nanomaterials; Metal oxide and metal sulphate nanomaterials; Amorphous silica nanomaterials; Organic pigments; Grouping; Read-across; Intrinsic material and system-dependent properties; Biopersistence and biodistribution; Cellular effects; Apical toxic effects

资金

  1. EU FP7 project MARINA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Case studies covering carbonaceous nanomaterials, metal oxide and metal sulphate nanomaterials, amorphous silica and organic pigments were performed to assess the Decision-making framework for the grouping and testing of nanomaterials (DF4nanoGrouping). The usefulness of the DF4nanoGrouping for nanomaterial hazard assessment was confirmed. In two tiers that rely exclusively on non-animal test methods followed by a third tier, if necessary, in which data from rat short-term inhalation studies are evaluated, nanomaterials are assigned to one of four main groups (MGs). The DF4nanoGrouping proved efficient in sorting out nanomaterials that could undergo hazard assessment without further testing. These are soluble nanomaterials (MG1) whose further hazard assessment should rely on read-across to the dissolved materials, high aspect-ratio nanomaterials (MG2) which could be assessed according to their potential fibre toxicity and passive nanomaterials (MG3) that only elicit effects under pulmonary overload conditions. Thereby, the DF4nanoGrouping allows identifying active nanomaterials (MG4) that merit in-depth investigations, and it provides a solid rationale for their sub-grouping to specify the further information needs. Finally, the evaluated case study materials may be used as source nanomaterials in future read-across applications. Overall, the DF4nanoGrouping is a hazard assessment strategy that strictly uses animals as a last resort. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据