Skip to main content
HHS Author Manuscripts logoLink to HHS Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Toxicol Lett. 2018 Jun 18;298:112–124. doi: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2018.06.003

Biological monitoring of workers exposed to engineered nanomaterials

P Schulte a,*, V Leso b, M Niang c, I Iavicoli b
PMCID: PMC6239923  NIHMSID: NIHMS983262  PMID: 29920308

Abstract

As the number of nanomaterial workers increase there is need to consider whether biomonitoring of exposure should be used as a routine risk management tool. Currently, no biomonitoring of nanomaterials is mandated by authoritative or regulatory agencies. However, there is a growing knowledge base to support such biomonitoring, but further research is needed as are investigations of priorities for biomonitoring. That research should be focused on validation of biomarkers of exposure and effect. Some biomarkers of effect are generally non-specific. These biomarkers need further interpretation before they should be used. Overall biomonitoring of nanomaterial workers may be important to supplement risk assessment and risk management efforts.

Keywords: Hazard identification, Exposure assessment, Risk management

1. Introduction

The utility and novelty of engineered matter at the nanoscale is driving a revolution in science and commerce (Roco, 1997; Stirling, 2018). Engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) offer the opportunity to make products lighter, stronger, more conductive, and generally “smarter” (Iavicoli et al., 2014a,b; Navya and Daima, 2016; Thiruvengadam et al., 2018). ENMs entered commerce in the early 2000s and found utility in many sectors and commercial products. Indeed, workers have been and are expected to be increasingly involved and exposed to ENMs in various applications as well as along their whole life-cycle, from research to end-life or recycling (Schulte et al., 2016).

Simultaneously, occupational health concerns have emerged regarding the possible impact of such nano-sized materials on the health of exposed employees. These concerns were based on previous evidence about the effects of ultrafine particulate matter derived from air pollution epidemiological studies, data extrapolated from investigations on the health consequences of diesel and welding fume exposures that may contain incidental nanoparticles (NPs), and preliminary toxicological findings obtained in vitro and in vivo models with ENMs (Iavicoli et al., 2011, 2012, 2016; Leso et al., 2017; Oberdörster and Yu, 1999; Peters et al., 2011; Stone et al., 2017).

Assessing the occupational risks derived from ENM exposure is a challenging task. This is because of difficulties in characterizing their potential hazard due to their huge physico-chemical variability, as well as in adequately assessing environmental exposure and individual response. In fact, to date, although there has been extensive research, no standardized environmental monitoring strategies to assess workplace and breathing zone exposures, nor the physico-chemical ENM features to be measured as the most effective dose metric parameters are widely agreed upon (Brouwer et al., 2009; Brouwer, 2010; Pietroiusti et al., 2018). Similarly there are no instances of regular monitoring of nano-material workers for biomarkers of effect. This is in part likely because these markers are not specific and have not been fully validated as indicators of adverse effects of specific exposure.

Nonetheless, biological monitoring may contribute to the identification of potential hazards of ENMs and to the assessment of occupational exposure to such xenobiotics; therefore, supporting a more adequate assessment and management of risks (Schulte and Hauser, 2012). In this study, the current status of biological monitoring for ENM workers will be addressed.

2. Methods

In order to review the available scientific literature on biological monitoring, a framework matrix was employed (Fig. 1). pubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched. Our search strategy was aimed to identify issues concerning the development and use of biomarkers that may be helpful to address the different steps along (Fig. 1) the continuum of occupational safety and health actions from hazard identification to risk management (x-axis) (Schulte and Hauser, 2012). Additionally, the literature related to various classes of biomarkers (y-axis) was assessed for each category and subcategory in the continuum. The objective of the search was to identify papers that raised issues in the use of biomarkers for a cell or cells in the matrix. These issues will be discussed under the categories of biomonitoring, epidemiological research, and medical surveillance. However, as the major findings were from toxicological research on ENMs, these will be presented to establish a foundation for thinking about the utility of various types of biomarkers for other purposes in the continuum. There is a rich literature on the validation of biomarkers that can be consulted regarding their utility (Bonassi and Au, 2002; Schulte and Hauser, 2012; Schulte and Talaska, 1995).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Framework for literature search strategy.

3. Hazard identification

Since the late 1990s, there has been a growing knowledge-base about the potential adverse effects of ENMs. This seems a challenging issue due to the diverse universe of materials characterized by combinations of a large number of physico-chemical characteristics and other parameters that may include size, shape, chemical composition, solubility, crystalline structure, charge, surface characteristics, attached functionalized groups, agglomeration, and impurities. In humans, ENMs generally have not yet been reported to cause adverse health effects (Bergamaschi, 2012). This may be due to a number of factors: the precautions adopted by the scientific and commercial communities to control exposure levels, the guidance from authoritative agencies responsible for the development of nanotechnology, the small number of involved workers, and the limited time since first exposure, which is generally 15–20 years, considering the periods that such products were introduced in commerce (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

Conceptual timeline for growth of nanomaterial products.

Considering that nanotechnology is an enabling technology diffused through many productive sectors, the mass of produced ENMs is generally small. In these complex industrial scenarios, ENM dose-response relationships may be underestimated by the confounding influence of other possible chemical co exposures. Nevertheless, hazard research in the last 15 years has shown that some types of ENMs appears to have the ability to result in adverse effects in animals. Table 1 shows an overview of the toxicological findings. Interestingly, toxicological evidence may be helpful in extrapolating information for biological monitoring.

Table 1.

General Overview of Toxicology Findings for ENMs to date.

•Verified the correlation of particle surface area with biological effects (Duffin et al., 2001; Schmid and Stoeger, 2016)
•Confirmed that particle size is generally an important factor in toxicity but other physico-chemical factors may play major roles (Driscoll, 1996; Oberdörster et al., 2005)
•Confirmed that nanoparticles could reach the alveoli and could enter the interstitium and blood stream (Kreyling et al., 2009; Oberdӧrster et al., 1992)
•Demonstrated that pulmonary exposure to carbon nanotubes (CNTs) causes alveolar interstitial fibrosis, which develops rapidly and is persistent. Fibrotic potency appears related to the physicochemical properties of the CNT (Shvedova et al., 2005)
•Demonstrated that pulmonary exposure to nanoparticles can cause cardiovascular effects (alteration of heart rate and blood pressure, and microvascular dysfunction) (Li et al., 2007; Nurkiewicz et al., 2008)
•Demonstrated that pulmonary exposure to some nanomaterials may be carcinogenic (Kuempel et al., 2017; Rittinghausen et al., 2014; Sargent et al., 2014)
•Demonstrated that multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) (Mitsui-7) are a promoter of lung cancer (Kuempel et al., 2017)
•Demonstrated that nanoparticles deposited in the lung can translocate to distal sites (Aragon et al., 2017; Erdely et al., 2009; Mercer et al., 2013) Demonstrated that insoluble nanoparticles do not appear to rapidly cross intact skin (Prow et al., 2011)
•Demonstrated that nanoparticle penetration through intact skin is not likely but exposure to sensitizers and irritants still a concern (Gwinn and Vallyathan, 2006; Prow et al., 2011)

3.1. In vitro studies

In vitro studies provide information concerning molecular effects of ENMs on cellular models, therefore suggesting possible modes of action in relation also to the intrinsic ENM physico-chemical features. This information may be important to define the hazardous properties of such nanoscale materials, a critical step in the identification of suitable biomarkers. Different ENMs, including silver (Ag)- (Müller et al., 2018; Murphy et al., 2016), titanium dioxide (TiO2)- (Kongseng et al., 2016; Patil et al., 2016; Renwick et al., 2001), zinc oxide (ZnO)- (Patil et al., 2016), silica (SiO2)- (Breznan et al., 2017), magnesium oxide (MgO)-NPs (Mahmoud et al., 2016), and carbon based-NMs (Chatterjee et al., 2017; Chortarea et al., 2017; Kim and Yu, 2014), demonstrated cyto-toxic, inflammatory, and oxidative stress effects, as well as the reduction of specific cellular function in vitro models. The small ENM size, resulting in a high surface area to volume ratio, may enhance ENM biological reactivity and relative toxicity (Guichard et al., 2016; Kim and Ryu, 2013; Soares et al., 2016; Uboldi et al., 2016).

Additionally, for adequate hazard identification, the chemical nature and surface chemistry should be also considered as possible influencing factors, since differently composed ENMs, i.e., metal oxide-NPs vs multi-walled-carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) (Xia et al., 2013), Ag-NPs vs graphene oxide nano-sheets (Ivask et al., 2015), and differently functionalized NMs (Chatterjee et al., 2017; Magdolenova et al., 2015), resulted in diverse cytotoxic effects that could be also dependent on cellular type specificity (Chatterjee et al., 2017). The crystalline structure of the nano-compounds could also affect the toxicity of some ENMs, as in the case of anatase and rutile TiO2-NPs (Sayes et al., 2006). Shape-dependent effects have been reported for several ENMs, including Au- and TiO2-NPs, and carbon based-ENMs (Allegri et al., 2016; Chithrani et al., 2006; Hamilton et al., 2009; Park et al., 2003; Porter et al., 2013; Öner et al., 2017). ENMs with a high aspect ratio morphology have raised particular concern in the field of respiratory toxicology, because they may induce toxicity similar to other fibrous substances, e.g., asbestos (Donaldson et al., 2011). Overall, these data may support a different behavior of ENMs according to their primary features as well as also in relation to those properties secondarily acquired when coming in contact with different culture media (Ritz et al., 2015).

3.2. In vivo studies

In vivo studies are essential to define the toxico-kinetic and dynamic behavior of ENMs and particularly to identify early adverse effects and possible target organ damage whose investigation, through biomarkers detected in accessible biological matrices, may be important for a suitable planning of biological monitoring programs. As previously mentioned, the biomolecular interactions that ENMs may experience when in contact with biological fluids, strictly dependent on ENM exposure route, can determine the formation of the so called “protein corona,” which may affect ENM dynamic profile, and therefore, biological monitoring findings (Monopoli et al., 2012).

3.2.1. Preclinical alterations

As reported in cellular models, and also in human and animal experiments, ENMs elicited the activation of oxidative stress responses that could be monitored through the reduction in plasma levels of anti-oxidant defense systems. This was detected in workers involved in the manufacture and/or application of ENMs in Taiwan, and also found after a six month follow up period (Liao et al., 2014; Liou et al., 2012, 2016). Additionally, the increased exhaled breath condensate (EBC) concentrations of lipid, nucleic, and protein oxidation markers were detected in workers exposed to Fe2O3- and Fe3O4-NPs (Pelclova et al., 2016a), MWCNTs (Lee et al., 2015), and TiO2-NPs (Pelclova et al., 2017a, 2017b) compared to controls. In such epidemiological investigations, a dose-response correspondence was demonstrated according to the ENM environmental monitoring concentrations (Pelclova et al., 2016a, b) as well as the increase in risk levels established through a control binding nano-tool risk assessment approach (Liao et al., 2014).

Comparably, in animal models, reductions in plasma anti-oxidant defense systems and increased levels of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) and malondialdehyde (MDA) could be determined with SiO2 (Du et al.,2013; Liu and Sun, 2013), Ag (Genter et al., 2012; Martins et al., 2017), Ag-NPs in coexposure with TiO2-NPs (Martins et al., 2017), Fe2O3- NPs (Sundarraj et al., 2017), and multi-walled carbon nanotube (MWCNTs) exposures (Reddy et al., 2011).

Regarding inflammatory response, blood levels of fibrinogen and pro-inflammatory cytokines were increased in workers exposed to nano-sized carbon black and MWCNTs (Fatkhutdinova et al., 2016; Liou et al., 2012; Vlaanderen et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2014) as well as to TiO2-NPs compared to controls (Zhao et al., 2018). Conversely, when comparing serum proteins associated with inflammatory responses in ENM exposed and not-exposed workers in research laboratories, significant increases in CD40, TNFR2, and CD62P serum concentrations were evident during the first shift of a working week and at the end of the week in exposed employees (Glass et al., 2017). These findings may suggest an anti-inflammatory and suppressive homeostatic cellular response in relation to an immune activation.

Enhanced levels of leukotrienes were detected in the EBCs of subjects occupationally exposed to TiO2-NPs (Pelclova et al., 2016c) and MWCNTs (Lee et al., 2015). Comparably, increased concentrations of 8-isoprostane in EBC (Liou et al., 2017) and enhanced fractional exhaled nitric oxide were reported in workers exposed to metal oxide ENMs (Wu et al., 2014), also when the analysis was stratified according to the type of NM exposure (SiO2, TiO2, indium tin oxide-NPs), while potential fibrotic and pro-inflammatory biomarkers were detected in the sputum of MWCNT-involved workers (Fatkhutdinova et al., 2016). Conversely, in research laboratory workers handling ENMs, no significant alterations in exhaled nitric oxide could be detected (Glass et al., 2017).

Alterations in blood acute-phase proteins and cytokine concentrations were also detected in animal models through acute to sub-acute administrations of different types of metallic or metal oxide-NPs such as TiO2- (Park et al., 2009), CeO2- (Nalabotu et al., 2011; Srinivas et al., 2011), Fe3O4- (Chen et al., 2010; Park et al., 2010; Srinivas et al., 2012)-, Ag- (Holland et al., 2015, 2016), and SiO2-NPs (Downs et al., 2012; Du et al., 2013; Lu et al., 2011) as well as with carbon-based NPs (Erdely et al., 2009). Interestingly, such preclinical alterations, whatever the biological matrix employed, may function both as indicators of early effects before clinical manifestations may occur and as indirect markers of exposure although with a low specificity for ENMs (Aragon et al., 2017; Erdely et al., 2009; Shvedova et al., 2016).

3.2.2. Pathological alterations

Pathological alterations pertain to a greater understanding of the potential for adverse effects following exposure. In highly exposed nanoscale carbon black workers, alterations in pulmonary functional parameters were observed compared to controls. This suggests possible adverse respiratory alterations (Zhang et al., 2014), although other investigations failed to detect such changes in MWCNT (Lee et al., 2015; Liao et al., 2014; Vlaanderen et al., 2017) and TiO2-NP exposed employees (Pelclova et al., 2016c, 2017b) as well as in workers handling ENMs in research laboratories (Glass et al., 2017).

Interestingly, a significant dose-dependent increase in the pulmonary surfactant protein D serum levels, as a biomarker of lung damage, was detected in workers employed in a packaging workshop of a nano-TiO2 manufacturing plant in eastern China (Zhao et al., 2018). In these workers, alterations in cardiovascular disease markers, i.e., VCAM-1, ICAM-1, LDL, and TC, were associated with occupational ENM exposure (Zhao et al., 2018). Haematological alterations were reported in animals after oral or intra-gastric exposure to ZnO-NPs (Park et al., 2014) and TiO2-NPs (Vasantharaja et al., 2015) as well as after dermal exposure to hydroxyapatite-NPs (Parayanthala Valappil et al., 2014), while could not be detected after a sub-acute inhalation of CeO-NPs (Gosens et al., 2016). Increased ALT concentrations and decreased albumin levels in serum as markers of hepatocyte injury, confirmed also by histopathological alterations, were reported in rats intratracheally instilled with CeO2-NPs (Nalabotu et al., 2011). The hepatotoxic potential of ENMs has been also documented in animals orally treated with ZnO- (Park et al., 2014), Ag-, and Au-NPs (Shrivastava et al., 2016). Significant nephrotoxic alterations principally induced by metallic NPs have been demonstrated through the assessment of the kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1) urinary level (Blum et al., 2015; Iavicoli et al., 2016) as well as by the BUN and creatinine serum biomarkers following an oral exposure to Cu- (Chen et al., 2006; Lei et al., 2008; Liao and Liu, 2012; Sarkar et al., 2011), Au- (Shrivastava et al., 2016), and mesopourus silica-NPs (Li et al., 2015). Indicators for the abovementioned alterations may function as potential biomarkers helpful to define target organs of ENM toxicity and, in turn, suggest potential pathological health conditions susceptible to be aggravated by ENM exposure.

3.2.3. Genotoxicity

Due to their small particle size, large surface area, and physico-chemical characteristics, NPs exhibit unpredictable genotoxic properties. Studies on workers failed to show genotoxic effects (Liao et al., 2014; Liou et al., 2012) while a general dose-dependent increase in DNA strand breaks and micronucleus (MN) frequency was found in human peripheral blood cells treated in vitro with metal or metal oxide-NPs (Colognato et al., 2008; Di Bucchianico et al., 2013; Flower et al., 2012; Ghosh et al., 2010, 2012, 2013; Kang et al., 2008, 2011; Paino et al., 2012; Soni et al., 2017; Tavares et al., 2014), carbon-based NPs (Cveticanin et al., 2010; Öner et al., 2017; Tavares et al., 2014), and dendrimers (Ziemba et al., 2012). Concerning in vivo results, a significant increase in such parameters was detected in the peripheral blood cells of TiO2- (Song et al., 2012; Trouiller et al., 2009) and ZnO-NP treated animals (Patil et al., 2016), as compared to controls, and a dose-dependent increase in DNA fragmentation percentage was detected in lymphocytes of SiO2 and Fe2O3-NP treated rats (Jiménez-Villarreal et al., 2017). However, positive results were not always confirmed and conflicting results were reported also for other metallic or metal oxide ENMs (Balasubramanyam et al., 2009; Chen et al., 2014; Cordelli et al., 2017; Downs et al., 2012; Lindberg et al., 2012; Sadiq et al., 2012; Singh et al., 2013a, b; Song et al., 2012; Tiwari et al., 2011). This may suggest a possible influencing role of different ENM physico-chemical features, routes of exposure, and administered doses.

3.3. “Omic techniques” for hazard identification

Traditional toxicology is rapidly evolving into a system-based approach, able to capture almost all the interactions between living systems and endogenous and/or exogenous xenobiotics (Balbo et al., 2017). “Omic” techniques may reveal methods helpful to assess a wide range of biological responses induced by ENM exposures, therefore, they may be promising tools for the development of novel biomarkers of exposure and early effect (Fadeel, 2015; Schulte and Hauser, 2012). These techniques currently include genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and more recent approaches, such as metabolomics, and adductomics involved into gene expression and its consequences.

3.3.1. Genomics

Genomic studies may provide the opportunity to detect injury at the molecular level and the signaling pathways involved in organ damage long before the clinical symptoms occur (Andersen and Krewski, 2009; Klaper et al., 2014). Several toxicogenomic studies have investigated the in vitro and in vivo response, principally pulmonary gene expression changes, to NMs using DNA microarray analysis (Aydın et al., 2017; Costa et al., 2018; Decan et al., 2016; Ellinger-Ziegelbauer and Pauluhn, 2009; Gao et al., 2012; Husain et al., 2013; Li et al., 2013, 2017; Pacurari et al., 2011; Snyder-Talkington et al., 2015). However, accessible and more easily applicable biological matrices, i.e., blood or peripheral blood cells, have been rarely employed to assess systemic alterations; determining these correlations in animal models is an important part of practical biomarker validation. The expression of genes involved in immune, inflammatory and oxidative stress responses was affected by Au-NP-oligonucleotide complexes in human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (Kim et al., 2012), by graphene oxide also functionalized with amino groups in T lymphocytes and mononuclear cell lines (Orecchioni et al., 2017). In in vivo experiments, blood expression changes in genes involved in inflammation, oxidative stress, growth factors, tissue remodeling, and endothelial function were obtained in circulating blood cells of animals treated with SW- or MWCNTs (Erdely et al., 2009).

3.3.2. Transcriptomics

Transcriptomics aims at quantifying changes in gene expression through the enumeration of the number of mRNA copies (Costa and Fadeel, 2016). A significant increase in the mRNA expression of KL-6, a marker for the diagnosis and monitoring of interstitial lung diseases, as well as its up-stream and down-stream genes, were detected in accessible biological matrices, i.e., whole blood and sputum samples collected from workers exposed to MWCNTs compared to controls (Fatkhutdinova et al., 2016; Shvedova et al., 2016). In vitro studies also reported mRNA expression changes in macrophages exposed to mesoporous silica-NPs and PEGylated mesoporous silica-NPs at doses that do not elicit acute cytotoxicity (Yazdimamaghani et al., 2017). Numerous blood mRNAs were significantly up- or down-regulated post-MWCNT inhalation in animals developing lung pathological changes (Dymacek et al., 2015; Snyder-Talkington et al., 2013, 2016). Therefore, changes in blood mRNA expression, may potentially serve as suitable biomarkers for ENM-induced lung pathological changes, providing less invasive measurements, compared to tissue analysis, that can be taken at shorter intervals with lower costs (Snyder-Talkington et al., 2016).

3.3.3. Proteomics

Proteomic investigation may be helpful to identify candidate protein biomarkers for the evaluation of ENM early effects (Matysiak et al., 2016). In vitro results reported differently expressed proteome profiles related to cellular viability, oxidative stress, and heat response processes in human lung cells exposed to MWCNTs (Phuyal et al., 2018) as well as in the human monocytes treated with to Au-, CuO-, and CdTe-NPs (Tarasova et al., 2017). On the other hand, in vivo studies demonstrated an affected expression of proteins associated with metabolism, oxidative stress, and immune responses following TiO2-NP inhalatory exposure (Maurer et al., 2016). More recently, the possible employment of proteomic analysis for the detection of protein carbonylation patterns as persistent, sensitive, and indirect biomarkers of ENM induced oxidative stress reaction has been explored (Driessen et al., 2015; Riebeling et al., 2016). Overall, the suitability of these proteomic changes as biological indicators of effect should be firstly confirmed by traditional biochemistry, thus supporting their effectiveness in detecting early NP toxicity.

3.3.4. Metabolomics

Metabolomics is the comprehensive analysis of all the metabolites of an organism or specified biological samples (Robertson et al., 2011). In vitro metabolomic data, demonstrated that CeO-, SiO2- and CuO-NPs could affect the lipidome profile, and compromise the Phase II conjugational capacity in exposed hepatic cells (Kitchin et al., 2017). Differently hydroxylated or carboxylated functionalized CNTs induced alterations in amino acid metabolisms in hepatic and bronchial cells (Chatterjee et al., 2017) while an antioxidant effect was observed for chitosan-coated or ceria supported-Au-NPs in human peripheral blood cells (Palomino-Schätzlein et al., 2017). Concerning the metabolic profiling of ENM effects, as a rapid in vivo screening for nano-toxicity biomarkers, analyses performed in serum and urine of rats treated with Cu- (Lei et al., 2008) and TiO2-NPs (Bu et al., 2010; Tang et al., 2010, 2011) provided evidence for the hepatotoxicity, nephrotoxicity and alterations in energy metabolism induced by these NPs. Other studies reported the ability of Ag- (Hadrup et al., 2012; Xie et al., 2018), Fe2O3-(Feng et al., 2010), SiO2-NPs (Lu et al., 2011; Parveen et al., 2012), carbon 14-labeled C60 fullerenes (Sumner et al., 2010) and CNTs (Lin et al., 2013) to affect the liver, energy, lipid, glucose, and amino acid metabolism as assessed by the alterations found in serum and urine metabolic pathways, while amorphous SiO2, zirconium dioxides, and barium sulphate-NPs failed to show a relevant impact on plasma metabolome patterns (Buesen et al., 2014). Although interesting, the different and not always well characterized ENMs employed, as well as the lack of standardized analytical techniques and procedures, make the results difficult to compare, and no definite conclusions to be extrapolated.

3.3.5. Adductomics

Adductomic approaches have been developed to comprehensively describe toxicological features in response to a genotoxic xenobiotic insult (Hemeryck et al., 2016; Villalta and Balbo, 2017). Specific classes of DNA adducts are those resulting from the reaction of ROS (%OH) with DNA, i.e., the 8-hydroxy-deoxy-guanosine (8-OH-dG). In field studies, 8-OH-dG concentrations were measured in easily available biological matrices collected from exposed workers, although with variable results. While no significant alterations were detected in urine, and plasma samples from employees of 14 manufacturing plants in Taiwan (Liao et al., 2014; Liou et al., 2012), increased concentrations were more recently reported in urine and white blood cells of workers exposed to metal oxide ENMs, whatever the type of ENM was considered (Liou et al., 2016, 2017), and in EBCs obtained from TiO2-NP exposed subjects (Pelclova et al., 2016b). This DNA damage has been also investigated in vitro models exposed to metal or metal oxide ENMs, which demonstrated significant increases (Ng et al., 2017) although with a cellular type specificity (Mahmoud et al., 2016), and in Ag-NP treated animals that showed increased urinary concentrations of this biomarker (Chuang et al., 2013). The field of DNA adduct research is a highly promising area due to their potential. This is primarily related to the fact that, for instance, adducts may be interpreted as indicators of internal doses, biologically effective dose, and early effect, as well as susceptibility. Though the need exists to be validated specifically for each purpose.

3.3.6. Epigenetics

Epigenetics refers to heritable, reversible changes in gene expression occurring without alterations in DNA sequence (Shyamasundar et al., 2015; Sierra et al., 2016). DNA methylation, histone tail, and microRNA modifications are considered useful epigenetic markers. Recent research demonstrated that CNTs (Brown et al., 2016; Chatterjee et al., 2017; Li et al., 2016; Öner et al., 2017; Tabish et al., 2017), Au- (Tabish et al., 2017), TiO2-(Bai et al., 2015; Patil et al., 2016), SiO2-(Gong et al., 2010, 2012; Mytych et al., 2017), ZnO-(Choudhury et al., 2017), and CuO-NPs (Lu et al., 2016) were able to induce changes of specific methylation patterns, including tumor suppressor-, inflammatory-, and DNA repair genes in vitro and in vivo models. Interestingly, a significantly lower global DNA methylation in white blood cells collected from workers exposed to nanoscale indium tin oxide in plants in Taiwan was recently reported by Liou et al. (2017), while Ghosh et al. (2017), although failing to detect significant differences in global methylation, found significant changes in genespecific DNA methylation in MWCNT exposed workers compared to controls.

Histone conformational modifications may either facilitate or depress the access of transcriptional machinery to the promoter region of some genes, leading to gene silencing or activation, respectively. As concerns ENMs, a global hypoacetylation in human breast carcinoma cells causing transcriptional repression of anti-apoptotic genes, thereby promoting cellular death, was detected after cadmium telluride quantum dots exposure (CdTe-QDs) (Choi et al., 2008). Ag-NPs were reported to affect histone post-translational modifications thus inducing a reduction in hemoglobin levels in mouse erythroleukemia cells (Qian et al., 2015). Non-coding microRNAs have been investigated in an attempt to identify fine, regulator molecules in ENM induced toxicity since they can modulate gene expression through the interaction with other epigenetic processes (Zhao et al., 2016; Peschansky and Wahlestedt, 2014). The changes in the microRNA expression profiling induced by exposure to Fe2O3-NPs, CdTe-QDs, Au-, Ag-NPs and MWCNTs were demonstrated to globally affect the mRNA and protein output of human treated cells, subsequently affecting many key biological patterns (Eom et al., 2014; Li et al., 2011a, b; Ng et al., 2017). Micro-RNA expression changes, implicated in inflammation and immune reactions, were found in the lungs of mice intratracheally exposed to TiO2-NPs (Halappanavar et al., 2011). Changes in the blood levels of liver-specific miRNAs were identified in mice exposed to SiO2-NPs (Nagano et al., 2013). However, as the functional consequences of the above mentioned epigenetic alterations were not assessed, further characterization of miRNA responsive genes and their role in adverse effects need to be defined.

4. Exposure assessment

Exposure assessments primarily involve area and breathing zone monitoring, job-exposure matrix modeling, or exposure-banding (Kauppinen et al., 2014; Moretto, 2015; NIOSH, 2009, 2017). Although, in recent years, there has been a growth of strong literature on task-based environmental monitoring (Asbach et al., 2017; Brouwer, 2010; Brouwer et al., 2012; Eastlake et al., 2016; Methner et al., 2010a,b,2012), some challenging issues, including determining the best measurement metrics, availability of appropriate instrumentation, and diverse sampling strategies, prevent an adequate assessment of environmental exposure levels. Therefore, human biomonitoring (HBM) may function as a complementary means for exposure assessment that can take into account the inter-individual variability in absorption, metabolism, and excretion; the individual workload; and recent versus past exposure (Manno et al., 2010).

Currently there are no examples of HBM as a part of routine assessment of workers exposed to ENMs and no regulatory requirements are available for HBM. Nonetheless, there is a growing body of toxicological research that illustrates the possibility to verify some functional alterations detected in experimental settings as biomonitoring indicators for workers. For example, some ENMs can be detected in biological matrices, including blood or plasma, urine, and feces. Following metal- or metal-oxide-based ENM exposure, both via the inhalation or the intratracheal exposure (Balasubramanian et al., 2013; He et al., 2010; Semmler-Behnke et al., 2008; Sundarraj et al., 2017; Sung et al., 2009; Takenaka et al., 2001, 2006; Yu et al., 2007; Zhu et al., 2009) and via human skin application (Gulson et al., 2010, 2012), the elemental metal content is retrievable in blood, although generally in very small amounts. A positive dose-response relationship between the inhaled Ag-ENM and the Ag blood content was demonstrated in mice (Sung et al., 2009), although a differential size dependent biodistribution was reported for gold (Au)-NPs, because smaller 7-nm sized Au-NPs produced a greater metal content in blood compared to their larger 20-nm counterparts (Balasubramanian et al., 2013).

The duration of exposure can affect the interpretations of biomonitoring data, in fact, significant Ag-ENM accumulation in blood was evident after 15 days of treatment, but not following a shorter 5 day period of exposure. This suggests that the body burden of the ENMs is influenced by homeostatic processes (or the exposure could also be influencing homeostatic activities) rather than by the extent of the exposure (Iavicoli et al., 2014a,b). Detectable metal concentrations were reported also in urine samples collected from animals treated with metal or metal oxide ENMs via the respiratory or the dermal route of exposure (Balasubramanian et al., 2013; Gulson et al., 2010, 2012; Sundarraj et al., 2017; Zhu et al., 2009), but there would be no relationship described for any effect. Because of macrophage-mediated clearance mechanisms, the measurement of the elemental metal content in feces may be useful to evaluate the recent/current respiratory exposure to metal-NPs (Balasubramanian et al., 2013; Chuang et al., 2013; Li et al., 2016; Sundarraj et al., 2017e; tZahlu., 2009). However,it is rather difficult to routinely employ feces as a suitable biological matrix for occupational biomonitoring.

Exhaled breath condensate (EBC) is a promising matrix for human biological monitoring investigation, as demonstrated by the increased Ti levels in pre- and post-shift EBC samples collected from workers exposed to TiO2-NPs in a pigment production plant compared to unexposed controls (Pelclova et al., 2015, 2016b). Interestingly the biological levels of such an indicator resulted positively correlated with the environmental concentrations in different production or research areas of the plant. However, not all ENMs are easily found in body fluids. Carbon nanotubes are one example. In fact, there is minimal transport of carbon nanotubes from the alveoli to the blood, and they tend to move out of the blood rapidly in to various organs (Erdely et al., 2009).

5. Risk assessment

Taking into account what was previously described for ENM hazard assessment and exposure evaluation, it is possible to perceive the difficulties in defining suitable risk assessment strategies. Biological monitoring data, including biomarkers of exposure and effect, can be used in risk assessment involving nanomaterial workers, but thus far, there are no examples where biomarkers have been used in risk assessments. In this scenario, an exposure-response modeling should be pursued to fully exploit the potential of possible exposure indicators. In fact, when the dose-response relationship is defined, the biomarker of exposure does not only indicate the dose actually adsorbed but provides also a reasonably accurate quantitative estimate of the occupational risks at the group and/or individual level (Iavicoli et al., 2014a). Additionally, scientific efforts should be focused at employing biological monitoring data to develop occupational exposure limits for ENM workers. To do this, the relationship between biomarker levels and adverse effects must be clearly demonstrated in a study design that includes no-effect exposure levels.

The efforts involving categorical approaches to developing occupational exposure limits (OELs) are beginning to identify biomarkers to predict toxicity. For example, the Nanosolutions project tested 31 different engineered ENMs and, out of 8 million data points, identified 11 biomarkers that support the toxicity of these xenobiotics (Nanosolutions, 2018). The response of these markers at human exposure levels must be determined. The 11 biomarkers will then be applied in untested engineered ENMs. These and other approaches that used ENMs with known hazards and the biomarkers of effect related to them may ultimately be used in dose-response modeling.

Another area that involves biomarkers that may be useful in risk assessment and OEL development for ENMs is the use of “omic” technologies that may be useful to understand the interactions and specific pathways impacted by different ENMs. Such biomarkers should be carefully verified in accessible biological matrices under low-dose, long-term conditions of exposure to define their specificity for different ENM insults, their predictive value, and therefore their realistic applicability. Investigations of the effect of functional silica ENMs on a human lung carcinoma cell line showed that it is possible to identify an “omic” analog to the NOAEL involving a no observed transcriptomic effect level or NOTEL (Pisani et al., 2015). This is the level of transcriptomic effect below which cellular responses are not seen to occur and may be much lower than the NOAEL. It could be used as a point of departure in deriving reference values. The development of pathways depicting the sequence of events between exposure to a stressor, progressing through intermediate events, and culminating in an adverse outcome is a growing concept for use in risk assessment (OECD, 2017). This concept may be increasingly used by regulatory agencies and, consequently, there may be more pressure for biomonitoring related to it.

Another relevant contribution to possible ENM-tailored risk assessment processes can be derived from epidemiologic studies. The review of the “first wave” of epidemiological studies of NM workers showed that most were too limited to indicate risk, although some found increased biomarkers of oxidative stress and inflammation in exposed workers (Liou et al., 2015). However, exposure assessment was generally qualitative, study designs were generally cross-sectional, and various selection biases were possible. Therefore, suitable epidemiological research should be planned in order to verify environmental exposure to ENMs and their relationships with biological indicators of exposure and effect. However, no examples where biomarkers have been used in such process are currently available. Studies aimed to address the effectiveness of control technology in a nanomaterial workplace should be pursued not only as a primary way to test control effectiveness in workplaces but also as a useful mean to demonstrate the failure of prevention (Kreider and Halperin, 2011). It could be possible, in laboratory studies, to evaluate control designs and utilize a biomonitoring component of laboratory animals to supplement airborne exposure measures. Biological monitoring may be even more important, in consideration of the possible absorption of ENMs through the dermal route of exposure especially in conditions of compromised skin integrity due to pre-existing diseases or damaging coexposures (Brouwer et al., 2012; Gulson et al., 2010, 2012; Larese Filon et al., 2016; Osmond-McLeod et al., 2014).

6. Risk management

Biomonitoring is a risk management tool along with workplace exposure assessment and exposure controls. In this context, biological monitoring data could be used effectively to verify the efficacy of the exposure limit in protecting the health of the workers (Iavicoli et al., 2014a,b). At present, the utility of biomonitoring nanomaterial workers depends on the status of evidence about the hazard of particular ENMs that could be the target of biomonitoring. Biomonitoring should not be used as a substitute for controlling exposure or for taking precautionary control measures.

An additional application of biological monitoring in risk management is the medical surveillance of workers. This is the effort to assess asymptomatic workers for early indications of health problems. There are currently no mandated medical surveillance guidance for ENM workers except for ones involving baseline and period respiratory assessment (pulmonary function testing, x-ray) (NIOSH, 2013). No cellular or molecular biomonitoring is mandated. There is a sparse literature studying the effectiveness of medical surveillance for nanomaterial workers. Gulumian et al. (2016) conducted a review of structures of medical surveillance of nanomaterial workers and identified seven studies that met inclusion criteria. They concluded that there was very low quality of evidence that screening might detect adverse health effects associated with workplace exposures to ENMs. However, this study conflated epidemiological studies and medical surveillance and, as noted earlier, there has not been much time since first worker exposure and the possibility of identifying health effects in epidemiological studies in routine medical surveillance.

One further area of risk management that involves biomarkers of exposure and effect and shows great promise is to design out potential hazards in ENMs. This is known as prevention through design or “safety by design” (Geraci et al., 2015). The concept is illustrated by the identification of specific toxic endpoints that were observed after zebra fish were exposed to functionalized ENMs. This study allowed for the development of predictive models for the design of inherently safer ENMs. Similarly biomarkers found in large arrays in ENM studies may be the basis for material designs that will have reduced ENM hazards.

7. Research needs

For biological monitoring of nanomaterial workers to go forward, there is need for robust research to develop biological monitoring protocols (Iavicoli et al., 2014a,b). This should include the physico-chemical characterization of materials to which a population is exposed and well established understanding of toxico-kinetic and dynamic characteristics. This research may result in the determination of whether biological monitoring should measure direct parent compounds or possible metabolites or decomposition products. It may explain also the possible role of biomolecular corona formation in affecting ENM bio-disposition and, consequently, biomonitoring results.

There is an evident need to link biomarkers in experimental animals to biomarkers in humans. Candidate biomarkers must be validated with exposure and/or effects (Bergamaschi et al., 2015). Additionally, considering the extremely high doses frequently employed in experimental settings and the extremely low ENM retrieved fractions in biological fluids, potential biomarkers should be validated under low-doses and longer periods of treatment, through analytical techniques sensitive enough to address trace levels of biological markers. Moreover, the predictive significance of such biological monitoring alterations in terms of long-term effects, the influences exerted by ENM characteristics, modes and periods of exposure, and inter- and intra-individual variabilities should be assessed to define suitable biomarkers and accurate interpretation of their results.

Validation is a process—a sense of degree rather than an all-or-none-state (IPCS, 2001). Validation includes assessment not only of sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value, but also utility in studies of workers on a routine basis. Ultimately validation and developmental research to identify biomarkers for biomonitoring of workers will require human studies; these may be field, chamber, or epidemiologic studies. Such studies require attention to ethical legal and social issues. Of importance are issues of privacy, confidentiality, and notification of test and study results (Schulte and Smith, 2011).

8. Conclusion

There are no authoritative mandates or requirements currently available for biomonitoring of ENM workers. However, there is a growing body of research that is setting the stage for the use of bio-monitoring to supplement environment exposure assessments to achieve a suitable ENM risk assessment and management in occupational settings. Biomarkers may be particularly useful when exposure results in systemic effects. Biomonitoring requires the determination of the extent of the hazard of candidate nanomaterial and evidence that demonstrates biomarker presence in workers correlates with exposure. Biomarkers of effect may also be used to assess exposure and have similar developmental requirements as biomarkers of exposure with the additional need to account for non-specificity and homeostatic influences. If biomonitoring is to be used to assess early or potential health effects, there will be a need for prospective studies to support that use. Overall, there is a rich research base for biomonitoring. However, further work is required before biomonitoring workers can be routinely implemented.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank: Drs. Kai Savolainen and Glenn Talaska for comments on earlier drafts; Amanda Keenan and Amanda Stammer for processing; and Cheryl Hamilton for editing.

Footnotes

Publisher's Disclaimer: Disclaimer

The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

References

  1. Allegri M, Bianchi MG, Chiu M, Varet J, Costa AL, Ortelli S, Blosi M, Bussolati O, Poland CA, Bergamaschi E, 2016. Shape-related toxicity of titanium dioxide nanofibres. PLoS One 11, e0151365 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151365. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Andersen ME, Krewski D, 2009. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: bringing the vision to life. Toxicol. Sci 107, 324–330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfn255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Aragon J, Navascues N, Mendoza G, Irusta S, 2017. Laser-treated electrospun fibers loaded with nano-hydroxyapatite for bone tissue engineering. Int. J. Pharm 525, 112–122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2017.04.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Asbach C, Alexander C, Clavaguera S, Dahmann D, Dozol H, Faure B, Fierz M, Fontana L, Iavicoli I, Kaminski H, MacCalman L, Meyer-Plath A, Simonow B, van Tongeren M, Todea AM, 2017. Review of measurement techniques and methods for assessing personal exposure to airborne nanomaterials in workplaces. Sci. Total Environ 603–604, 793–806. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Aydın E, Türkez H, Hacımüftüoğlu F, Tatar A, Geyikoğlu F, 2017. Molecular genetic and biochemical responses in human airway epithelial cell cultures exposed to titanium nanoparticles in vitro. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A 105, 2056–2064. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.35994. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bai W, Chen Y, Gao A, 2015. Cross talk between poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 methylation and oxidative stress involved in the toxic effect of anatase titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Int. J. Nanomed 10, 5561–5569. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S88059. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Balasubramanyam A, Sailaja N, Mahboob M, Rahman MF, Hussain SM, Grover P, 2009. In vivo genotoxicity assessment of aluminum oxide nanomaterials in rat peripheral blood cells using the comet assay and micronucleus test. Mutagenesis 24, 245–251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mutage/gep003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Balasubramanian SK, Poh KW, Ong CN, Kreyling WG, Ong WY, Yu LE, 2013. The effect of primary particle size on biodistribution of inhaled gold nano-agglomerates. Biomaterials 34, 5439–5452. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.03.080. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Balbo S, Turesky RJ, Villalta PW, 2017. DNA adductomics. Chem. Res. Toxicol 27, 356–366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/tx4004352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Bergamaschi E, 2012. Human biomonitoring of engineered nanoparticles: an appraisal of critical issues and potential biomarkers. J. Nanomater 2012, 564121 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/564121 12 pp. [Google Scholar]
  11. Bergamaschi E, Poland C, Guseva Canu I, Prina-Mello A, 2015. The role of biological monitoring in nano-safety. Nanotoday 10 (3), 274–277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nantod.2015.02.001. [Google Scholar]
  12. Blum JL, Edwards JR, Prozialeck WC, Xiong JQ, Zelikoff JT, 2015. Effects of maternal exposure to cadmium oxide nanoparticles during pregnancy on maternal and offspring kidney injury markers using a murine model. J. Toxicol. Environ.Health Part A 78, 711–724. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15287394.2015.1026622. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Bonassi S, Au WW, 2002. Biomarker epidemiology studies for health risk prediction. Mutat. Res 511, 73–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1383-5742(02)00003-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Breznan D, Das DD, O’Brien JS, MacKinnon-Roy C, Nimesh S, Vuong NQ,Bernatchez S, DeSilva N, Hill M, Kumarathasan P, Vincent R, 2017. Differential cytotoxic and inflammatory potency of amorphous silicon dioxide nanoparticles of similar size in multiple cell lines. Nanotoxicology 11, 223–235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2017.1287313. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Brouwer D, 2010. Exposure to manufactured nanoparticles in different workplaces. Toxicology 269, 120–127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2009.11.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Brouwer D, van Duuren-Stuurman B, Berges M, Jankowska E, Bard D, Mark D, 2009. From workplace air measurement results towards estimates of exposure?Development of a strategy to assess exposure to manufactured nano-objects. J. Nanopart. Res 11, 1867–1881. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11051-009-9772-1. [Google Scholar]
  17. Brouwer D, Berges M, Virji MA, Fransman W, Bello D, Hodson L, Gabriel S, Tielemans E, 2012. Harmonization of measurement strategies for exposure to manufactured nano-objects. Report of a workshop. Ann. Occup. Hyg 56, 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/mer099. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Brown TA, Lee JW, Holian A, Porter V, Fredriksen H, Kim M, Cho YH, 2016. Alterations in DNA methylation corresponding with lung inflammation and as a biomarker for disease development after MWCNT exposure. Nanotoxicology 10, 453–461. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2015.1078852. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Bu Q, Yan G, Deng P, Peng F, Lin H, Xu Y, Cao Z, Zhou T, Xue A, Wang Y, Cen X, Zhao YL, 2010. NMR-based metabonomic study of the sub-acute toxicity of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in rats after oral administration. Nanotechnology 21, 125105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/21/12/125105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Buesen R, Landsiedel R, Sauer UG, Wohlleben W, Groeters S, Strauss V, Kamp H, van Ravenzwaay B, 2014. Effects of SiO2, ZrO2, and BaSO4 nanomaterials with or without surface functionalization upon 28-day oral exposure to rats. Arch. Toxicol 88, 1881–1906. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00204-014-1337-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Chatterjee N, Yang J, Yoon D, Kim S, Joo SW, Choi J, 2017. Differential crosstalk between global DNA methylation and metabolomics associated with cell type specific stress response by pristine and functionalized MWCNT. Biomaterials 115, 167–180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.11.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Chen Z, Meng H, Xing G, Chen C, Zhao Y, Jia G, Wang T, Yuan H, Ye C, Zhao F, Chai Z, Zhu C, Fang X, Ma B, Wan L, 2006. Acute toxicological effects of copper nanoparticles in vivo. Toxicol. Lett 163, 109–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2005.10.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Chen BA, Jin N, Wang J, Ding J, Gao C, Cheng J, Xia G, Gao F, Zhou Y, Chen Y, Zhou G, Li X, Zhang Y, Tang M, Wang X, 2010. The effect of magnetic nanoparticles of Fe3O4 on immune function in normal ICR mice. Int. J. Nanomed 5, 593–599. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S12162. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Chen Z, Wang Y, Ba T, Li Y, Pu J, Chen T, Song Y, Gu Y, Qian Q, Yang J, Jia G, 2014. Genotoxic evaluation of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in vivo and in vitro. Toxicol. Lett 226, 314–319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2014.02.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Chithrani BD, Ghazani AA, Chan WC, 2006. Determining the size and shape dependence of gold nanoparticle uptake into mammalian cells. Nano Lett 6, 662–668. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/nl052396o. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Choi AO, Brown SE, Szyf M, Maysinger D, 2008. Quantum dot-induced epigenetic and genotoxic changes in human breast cancer cells. J. Mol. Med. (Berlin Ger.) 86, 291–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00109-007-0274-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Chortarea S, Barosova H, Clift MJD, Wick P, Petri-Fink A, Rothen-Rutishauser B, 2017. Human asthmatic bronchial cells are more susceptible to subchronic repeated exposures of aerosolized carbon nanotubes at occupationally relevant doses than healthy cells. ACS Nano 11, 7615–7625. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.7b01992. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Choudhury SR, Ordaz J, Lo CL, Damayanti NP, Zhou F, Irudayaraj J, 2017. From the cover: zinc oxide nanoparticles-induced reactive oxygen species promotes multimodal cyto- and epigenetic toxicity. Toxicol. Sci 156, 261–274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfw252. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Chuang HC, Hsiao TC, Wu CK, Chang HH, Lee CH, Chang CC, Cheng TJ, Taiwan CardioPulmonary Research Group (T-CPR), 2013. Allergenicity and toxicology of inhaled silver nanoparticles in allergen-provocation mice models. Int. J. Nanomed 8, 4495–4506. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S52239. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Colognato R, Bonelli A, Ponti J, Farina M, Bergamaschi E, Sabbioni E, Migliore L, 2008. Comparative genotoxicity of cobalt nanoparticles and ions on human peripheral leukocytes in vitro. Mutagenesis 23, 377–382. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mutage/gen024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Cordelli E, Keller J, Eleuteri P, Villani P, Ma-Hock L, Schulz M, Landsiedel R,Pacchierotti F, 2017. No genotoxicity in rat blood cells upon 3- or 6-month inhalation exposure to CeO2 or BaSO4 nanomaterials. Mutagenesis 32, 13–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mutage/gew005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Costa PM, Fadeel B, 2016. Emerging systems biology approaches in nanotoxicology: towards a mechanism-based understanding of nanomaterial hazard and risk. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol 299, 101–111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2015.12.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Costa PM, Gosens I, Williams A, Farcal L, Pantano D, Brown DM, Stone V, Cassee FR, Halappanavar S, Fadeel B, 2018. Transcriptional profiling reveals gene expression changes associated with inflammation and cell proliferation following short-term inhalation exposure to copper oxide nanoparticles. J. Appl.Toxicol 38, 385–397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.3548. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Cveticanin J, Joksic G, Leskovac A, Petrovic S, Sobot AV, Neskovic O, 2010. Using carbon nanotubes to induce micronuclei and double strand breaks of the DNA in human cells. Nanotechnology 21, 015102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/21/1/015102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Decan N, Wu D, Williams A, Bernatchez S, Johnston M, Hill M, Halappanavar S, 2016. Characterization of in vitro genotoxic, cytotoxic and transcriptomic responses following exposures to amorphous silica of different sizes. Mutat. Res. Genet. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen 796, 8–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2015.11.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Di Bucchianico S, Fabbrizi MR, Misra SK, Valsami-Jones E, Berhanu D, Reip P, Bergamaschi E, Migliore L, 2013. Multiple cytotoxic and genotoxic effects induced in vitro by differently shaped copper oxide nanomaterials. Mutagenesis 28, 287–299. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mutage/get014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Donaldson K, Murphy F, Schinwald A, Duffin R, Poland CA, 2011. Identifying the pulmonary hazard of high aspect ratio nanoparticles to enable their safety-by-design. Nanomedicine (Lond. U.K.) 6, 143–156. http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/nnm.10.139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Downs TR, Crosby ME, Hu T, Kumar S, Sullivan A, Sarlo K, Reeder B, Lynch M, Wagner M, Mills T, Pfuhler S, 2012. Silica nanoparticles administered at the maximum tolerated dose induce genotoxic effects through an inflammatory reaction while gold nanoparticles do not. Mutat. Res 745, 38–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2012.03.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Driessen MD, Mues S, Vennemann A, Hellack B, Bannuscher A, Vimalakanthan V, Riebeling C, Ossig R, Wiemann M, Schnekenburger J, Kuhlbusch TA, Renard B, Luch A, Haase A, 2015. Proteomic analysis of protein carbonylation: a useful tool to unravel nanoparticle toxicity mechanisms. Part. Fibre Toxicol 12, 36 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12989-015-0108-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Driscoll KE, 1996. Role of inflammation in the development of rate lung tumors in response to chronic particle exposure. Inhal. Toxicol 8, 139–153. [Google Scholar]
  41. Du Z, Zhao D, Jing L, Cui G, Jin M, Li Y, Liu X, Liu Y, Du H, Guo C, Zhou X,Sun Z, 2013. Cardiovascular toxicity of different sizes amorphous silica nano-particles in rats after intratracheal instillation. Cardiovasc. Toxicol 13, 194–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12012-013-9198-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Duffin R, Tran C, Clouter A, Brown D, MacNee W, Stone V, Donaldson K, 2001. The importance of surface area and specific reactivity in the acute pulmonary inflammatory response to particles. Ann. Occup. Hyg 46, 242–245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/mef684. [Google Scholar]
  43. Dymacek J, Snyder-Talkington BN, Porter DW, Mercer RR, Wolfarth MG, Castranova V, Qian Y, Guo NL, 2015. mRNA and miRNA regulatory networks reflective of multi-walled carbon nanotube-induced lung inflammatory and fibrotic pathologies in mice. Toxicol. Sci 144, 51–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfu262. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Eastlake AC, Beaucham C, Martinez KF, Dahm MM, Sparks C, Hodson LL, Geraci CL, 2016. Refinement of the nanoparticle emission assessment technique into the nanomaterial exposure assessment technique (NEAT 2.0). Occup. Environ. Hyg 13, 708–717. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2016.1167278. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Ellinger-Ziegelbauer H, Pauluhn J, 2009. Pulmonary toxicity of multi-walled carbon nanotubes (Baytubes) relative to alpha-quartz following a single 6h inhalation exposure of rats and a 3 months post-exposure period. Toxicology 266, 16–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2009.10.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Eom HJ, Chatterjee N, Lee J, Choi J, 2014. Integrated mRNA and micro RNA profiling reveals epigenetic mechnism of differential sensitivity of Jurkat T cells to AGNPs and Ag ions. Toxicol. Lett 229, 311–318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2014.05.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Erdely A, Hulderman T, Salmen R, Liston A, Zeidler-Erdely PC, Schwegler-Berry D, Castranova V, Koyama S, Kim YA, Endo M, Simeonova PP, 2009. Cross-talk between lung and systemic circulation during carbon nanotube respiratory exposure. Potential biomarkers. Nano Lett 9, 36–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/nl801828z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Fadeel B, 2015. Systems biology in nanosafety research. Nanomedicine (Lond. U.K.) 10, 1039–1041. http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/nnm.15.17. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Fatkhutdinova LM, Khaliullin TO, Vasil’yeva OL, Zalyalov RR, Mustafin IG, Kisin ER, Birch ME, Yanamala N, Shvedova AA, 2016. Fibrosis biomarkers in workers exposed to MWCNTs. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol 299, 125–131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2016.02.016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Feng J, Liu H, Zhang L, Bhakoo K, Lu L, 2010. An insight into the metabolic responses of ultra-small superparamagnetic particles of iron oxide using metabonomic analysis of biofluids. Nanotechnology 21, 395101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/21/39/395101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Flower NA, Brabu B, Revathy M, Gopalakrishnan C, Raja SV, Murugan SS, Kumaravel TS, 2012. Characterization of synthesized silver nanoparticles and assessment of its genotoxicity potentials using the alkaline comet assay. Mutat. Res 742, 61–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2011.12.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Gao G, Ze Y, Li B, Zhao X, Zhang T, Sheng L, Hu R, Gui S, Sang X, Sun Q, Cheng J, Cheng Z, Wang L, Tang M, Hong F, 2012. Ovarian dysfunction and gene-expressed characteristics of female mice caused by long-term exposure to titanium dioxide nanoparticles. J. Hazard. Mater 243, 19–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.08.049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Genter MB, Newman NC, Shertzer HG, Ali SF, Bolon B, 2012. Distribution and systemic effects of intranasally administered 25 nm silver nanoparticles in adult mice. Toxicol. Pathol 40, 1004–1013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0192623312444470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Geraci C, Heidel D, Sayes C, Hodson L, Schulte P, Eastlake A, Brenner S, 2015. Perspectives on the design of safer nanomaterials and manufacturing processes. J. Nanopart. Res 17, 366 10.1007%2Fs11051–015-3152–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Ghosh M, Bandyopadhyay M, Mukherjee A, 2010. Genotoxicity of titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles at two trophic levels: plant and human lymphocytes. Chemosphere 81, 1253–1262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.09.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Ghosh MJM, Sinha S, Chakraborty A, Mallick SK, Bandyopadhyay M, Mukherjee A, 2012. In vitro and in vivo genotoxicity of silver nanoparticles. Mutat. Res 749, 60–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2012.08.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Ghosh M, Chakraborty A, Mukherjee A, 2013. Cytotoxic, genotoxic and the hemolytic effect of titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles on human erythrocyte and lymphocyte cells in vitro. J. Appl. Toxicol 33, 1097–1110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.2863. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Ghosh M, Öner D, Poels K, Tabish AM, Vlaanderen J, Pronk A, Kuijpers E, Lan Q, Vermeulen R, Bekaert B, Hoet PH, Godderis L, 2017. Changes in DNA methylation induced by multi-walled carbon nanotube exposure in the workplace. Nanotoxicology 11, 1195–1210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2017.1406169. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Glass DC, Mazhar M, Xiang S, Dean P, Simpson P, Priestly B, Plebanski M, Abramson M, Sim MR, Dennekamp M, 2017. Immunological effects among workers who handle engineered nanoparticles. Occup. Environ. Med 74, 868–876. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2016-104111. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Gong C, Tao G, Yang L, Liu J, Liu Q, Zhuang Z, 2010. SiO(2) nanoparticles induce global genomic hypomethylation in HaCaT cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun 397, 397–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2010.05.076. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Gong C, Tao G, Yang L, Liu J, Liu Q, Zhuang Z, 2012. Methylation of PARP-1 promoter involved in the regulation of nano-SiO2-induced decrease of PARP-1 mRNA expression. Toxicol. Lett 209, 264–269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2012.01.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Gosens I, Cassee FR, Zanella M, Manodori L, Brunelli A, Costa AL, Bokkers BG, de Jong WH, Brown D, Hristozov D, Stone V, 2016. Organ burden and pulmonary toxicity of nano-sized copper (II) oxide particles after short-term inhalation exposure. Nanotoxicology 10, 1084–1095. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2016.1172678. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Guichard Y, Fontana C, Chavinier E, Terzetti F, Gaté L, Binet S, Darne C, 2016Cytotoxic and genotoxic evaluation of different synthetic amorphous silica nanomaterials in the V79 cell line. Toxicol. Ind. Health 32, 1639–1650. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0748233715572562. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Gulson B, McCall M, Korsch M, Gomez L, Casey P, Oytam Y, Taylor A, McCulloch M, Trotter J, Kinsley L, Greenoak G, 2010. Small amounts of zinc from zinc oxide particles in sunscreens applied outdoors are absorbed through human skin. Toxicol. Sci 118, 140–149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfq243. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Gulson B, Wong H, Korsch M, Gomez L, Casey P, McCall M, McCulloch M, Trotter J, Stauber J, Greenoak G, 2012. Comparison of dermal absorption of zinc from different sunscreen formulations and differing UV exposure based on stable isotope tracing. Sci. Total Environ 420, 313–318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.12.046. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Gulumian M, Verbeek J, Andraos C, Sanabria N, de Jager P, 2016. Systematic review of screening and surveillance programs to protect workers from nanomaterials. PLoS One 11, e0166071 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166071. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Gwinn MR, Vallyathan V, 2006. Nanoparticles: health effects—pros and cons. Environ.Health Perspect 114, 1818–1825. http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.8871. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Hadrup N, Lam HR, Loeschner K, Mortensen A, Larsen EH, Frandsen H, 2012. Nanoparticulate silver increases uric acid and allantoin excretion in rats, as identified by metabolomics. J. Appl. Toxicol 32, 929–933. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.2779. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Halappanavar S, Jackson P, Williams A, Jensen KA, Hougaard KS, Vogel U, Yauk CL, Wallin H, 2011. Pulmonary response to surface-coated nanotitanium dioxide particles includes induction of acute phase response genes, inflammatory cascades, and changes in microRNAs: a toxicogenomic study. Environ. Mol. Mutagen 52, 425–439. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/em.20639. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Hamilton RF, Wu N, Porter D, Buford M, Wolfarth M, Holian A, 2009. Particle length-dependent titanium dioxide nanomaterials toxicity and bioactivity. Part. Fibre Toxicol 6, 35 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-8977-6-35. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. He X, Zhang H, Ma Y, Bai W, Zhang Z, Lu K, Ding Y, Zhao Y, Chai Z, 2010. Lung deposition and extrapulmonary translocation of nano-ceria after intratracheal instillation. Nanotechnology 21, 285103 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/21/28/285103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Hemeryck LY, Moore SA, Vanhaecke L, 2016. Mass spectrometric mapping of the DNA adductome as a means to study genotoxin exposure, metabolism, and effect. Anal. Chem 88, 7436–7446. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b00863. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Holland NA, Becak DP, Shannahan JH, Brown JM, Carratt SA, Winkle L,Pinkerton KE, Wang CM, Munusamy P, Baer DR, Sumner SJ, Fennell TR, Lust RM, Wingard CJ, 2015. Cardiac ischemia reperfusion injury following instillation of 20 nm citrate-capped nanosilver. J. Nanomed. Nanotechnol S6 http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7439.S6-006.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Holland NA, Thompson LC, Vidanapathirana AK, Urankar RN, Lust RM, Fennell TR, Wingard CJ, 2016. Impact of pulmonary exposure to gold core silver nanoparticles of different size and capping agents on cardiovascular injury. Part. Fibre Toxicol 13, 1 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12989-016-0159-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Husain M, Saber AT, Guo C, Jacobsen NR, Jensen KA, Yauk CL, Williams A,Vogel U, Wallin H, Halappanavar S, 2013. Pulmonary instillation of low doses of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in mice leads to particle retention and gene expression changes in the absence of inflammation. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol 269, 250–262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2013.03.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Iavicoli I, Leso V, Fontana L, Bergamaschi A, 2011. Toxicological effects of titanium dioxide nanoparticles: a review of in vitro mammalian studies. Eur. Rev. Med.Pharmacol. Sci 15, 481–508. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/964381. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Iavicoli I, Leso V, Bergamaschi A, 2012. Toxicological effects of titanium dioxide nanoparticles: a review of in vivo studies. J. Nanomater 36 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/964381 Article ID 964381. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Iavicoli I, Leso V, Manno M, Schulte PA, 2014a. Biomarkers of nanomaterial exposure and effect: current status. J. Nanopart. Res 16, 2302 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11051-014-2302-9. [Google Scholar]
  79. Iavicoli I, Leso V, Ricciardi W, Hodson LL, Hoover MD, 2014b. Opportunities and challenges of nanotechnology in the green economy. Environ. Health 13, 78 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-13-78. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Iavicoli I, Fontana L, Nordberg G, 2016. The effects of nanoparticles on the renal system. Crit. Rev. Toxicol 46, 490–560. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408444.2016.1181047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. IPCS, 2001. Environmental Health Criteria 222. Biomarkers in Risk Assessment: Validity and Validation. International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) (Accessed 30 January 2018). http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc222.htm.
  82. Ivask A, Voelcker NH, Seabrook SA, Hor M, Kirby JK, Fenech M, Davis TP, Ke PC, 2015. DNA melting and genotoxicity induced by silver nanoparticles and graphene. Chem. Res. Toxicol 28, 1023–1035. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrestox.5b00052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. Jiménez-Villarreal J, Rivas-Armendáriz DI, Arellano Pérez-Vertti RD, Olivas Calderón E, García-Garza R, Betancourt-Martínez ND, Serrano-Gallardo LB, Morán-Martínez J, 2017. Relationship between lymphocyte DNA fragmentation and dose of iron oxide (Fe2O3) and silicon oxide (SiO2) nanoparticles. Genet. Mol. Res 16, 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.4238/gmr16019206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Kang SJ, Kim BM, Lee YJ, Chung HW, 2008. Titanium dioxide nanoparticles trigger p53-mediated damage response in peripheral blood lymphocytes. Environ. Mol. Mutagen 49, 399–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/em.20399. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Kang SJ, Lee YJ, Kim BM, Choi YJ, Chung HW, 2011. Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in UVA-irradiated normal peripheral blood lymphocytes. Drug Chem. Toxicol 34, 277–284. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/01480545.2010.546800. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Kauppinen T, Uuksulainen S, Saalo A, Mäkinen I, Pukkala E, 2014. Use of the Finnish information system on occupational exposure (FINJEM) in epidemiologic, surveillance, and other applications. Ann. Occup. Hyg 58, 380–396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/met074. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  87. Kim S, Ryu DY, 2013. Silver nanoparticle-induced oxidative stress, genotoxicity and apoptosis in cultured cells and animal tissues. J. Appl. Toxicol 33, 78–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.2792. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Kim JS, Yu IJ, 2014. Single-wall carbon nanotubes (SWCNT) induce cytotoxicity and genotoxicity produced by reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation in phytohe-magglutinin (PHA)-stimulated male human peripheral blood lymphocytes. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health Part A 77, 1141–1153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15287394.2014.917062. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  89. Kim EY, Schulz R, Swantek P, Kunstman K, Malim MH, Wolinsky SM, 2012. Gold nanoparticle-mediated gene delivery induces widespread changes in the expression of innate immunity genes. Gene Ther 19, 347–353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gt.2011.95. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Kitchin KT, Stirdivant S, Robinette BL, Castellon BT, Liang X, 2017. Metabolomic effects of CeO2, SiO2 and CuO metal oxide nanomaterials on HepG2 cells. Part. Fibre Toxicol 14, 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12989-017-0230-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Klaper R, Arndt D, Bozich J, Dominguez G, 2014. Molecular interactions of nanomaterials and organisms: defining biomarkers for toxicity and high-throughput screening using traditional and next-generation sequencing approaches. Analyst 139, 882–895. http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c3an01644g. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. Kongseng S, Yoovathaworn K, Wongprasert K, Chunhabundit R, Sukwong P, Pissuwan D, 2016. Cytotoxic and inflammatory responses of TiO2 nanoparticles on human peripheral blood mononuclear cells. J. Appl. Toxicol 36, 1364–1373. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.3342. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  93. Kreider T, Halperin W, 2011. Engineered nanomaterials: learning from the past, planning for the future. J. Occup. Environ. Med 53, S108–S112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b013e31821b146a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  94. Kreyling WG, Semmler-Behnke M, Seitz J, Scymczak W, Wenk A, Mayer P, Takenaka S, Oberdörster G, 2009. Size dependence of the translocation of inhaled iridium and carbon nanoparticle aggregates from the lung of rats to the blood and secondary target organs. Inhal. Toxicol 21, 55–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08958370902942517. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  95. Kuempel ED, Jaurand MC, Møller P, Morimoto Y, Kobayashi N, Pinkerton KE, Sargent LM, Vermeulen RC, Fubini B, Kane AB, 2017. Evaluating the mechanistic evidence and key data gaps in assessing the potential carcinogenicity of carbon nanotubes and nanofibers in humans. Crit. Rev. Toxicol 47, 1–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408444.2016.1206061. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  96. Larese Filon F, Crosera M, Mauro M, Baracchini E, Bovenzi M, Montini T, Fornasiero P, Adami G, 2016. Palladium nanoparticles exposure: evaluation of permeation through damaged and intact human skin. Environ. Pollut 214, 497–503. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.04.077. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  97. Lee JS, Choi YC, Shin JH, Lee JH, Lee Y, Park SY, Baek JE, Park JD, Ahn K, Yu IJ, 2015. Health surveillance study of workers who manufacture multi-walled carbon nanotubes. Nanotoxicology 9, 802–811. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2014.978404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  98. Lei R, Wu C, Yang B, Ma H, Shi C, Wang Q, Wang Q, Yuan Y, Liao M, 2008Integrated metabolomic analysis of the nano-sized copper particle-induced hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity in rats: a rapid in vivo screening method for nanotoxicity. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol 232, 292–301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2008.06.026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  99. Leso V, Fontana L, Mauriello MA, Iavicoli I, 2017. Occupational risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials: limits, challenges and opportunities. Curr. Nanosci 13, 55–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1573413712666161017114934. [Google Scholar]
  100. Li Z, Hulderman T, Salmen R, Chapman R, Leonard SS, Young SH, Shvedova A, Luster MI, Simeonova PP, 2007. Cardiovascular effects of pulmonary exposure to single-wall carbon nanotubes. Environ. Health Perspect 115, 377–382. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  101. Li S, Wang H, Qi Y, Tu J, Bai Y, Tian T, Huang N, Wang Y, Xiong F, Lu Z, Xiao Z, 2011a. Assessment of nanomaterial cytotoxicity with SOLiD sequencing-based microRNA expression profiling. Biomaterials 32, 9021–9030. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011a.08.033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  102. Li S, Wang Y, Wang H, Bai Y, Liang G, Wang Y, Huang N, Xiao Z, 2011b. MicroRNAs as participants in cytotoxicity of CdTe quantum dots in NIH/3T3. Biomaterials 32, 3807–3814. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.01.074. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  103. Li B, Ze Y, Sun Q, Zhang T, Sang X, Cui Y, Wang X, Gui S, Tan D, Zhu M, Zhao X, Sheng L, Wang L, Hong F, Tang M, 2013. Molecular mechanisms of nanosized titanium dioxide-induced pulmonary injury in mice. PLoS One 8, e55563 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055563. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
  104. Li L, Liu T, Fu C, Tan L, Meng X, Liu H, 2015. Biodistribution, excretion, and toxicity of mesoporous silica nanoparticles after oral administration depend on their shape. Nanomedicine 11, 1915–1924. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nano.2015.07.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  105. Li J, Tian M, Cui L, Dwyer J, Fullwood NJ, Shen H, Martin FL, 2016. Low-dose carbon-based nanoparticle-induced effects in A549 lung cells determined by bio spectroscopy are associated with increases in genomic methylation. Sci. Rep 6, 20207 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep20207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  106. Li Y, Yan J, Ding W, Chen Y, Pack LM, Chen T, 2017. Genotoxicity and gene expression analyses of liver and lung tissues of mice treated with titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Mutagenesis 32, 33–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mutage/gew065. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  107. Liao M, Liu H, 2012. Gene expression profiling of nephrotoxicity from copper nanoparticles in rats after repeated oral administration. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol 34, 67–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2011.05.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  108. Liao HY, Chung YT, Lai CH, Wang SL, Chiang HC, Li LA, Tsou TC, Li WF,Lee HL, Wu WT, Lin MH, Hsu JH, Ho JJ, Chen CJ, Shih TS, Lin CC,Liou SH, 2014. Six-month follow-up study of health markers of nanomaterials among workers handling engineered nanomaterials. Nanotoxicology 8, 100–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2013.858793. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  109. Lin B, Zhang H, Lin Z, Fang Y, Tian L, Yang H, Yan J, Liu H, Zhang W, Xi Z, 2013. Studies of single-walled carbon nanotubes-induced hepatotoxicity by NMR-based metabonomics of rat blood plasma and liver extracts. Nanoscale Res. Lett 8, 1–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1556-276X-8-236. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  110. Lindberg HK, Falck GC, Catalan J, Koivisto AJ, Suhonen S, Jarventaus H, Rossi EM, Nykasenoja H, Peltonen Y, Moreno C, Alenius H, Tuomi T, Savolainen KM, Norppa H, 2012. Genotoxicity of inhaled nanosized TiO2 in mice. Mutat. Res 745, 58–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2011.10.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  111. Liou SH, Tsou TC, Wang AL, Li LA, Chiang HC, Li WF, Lin PP, Lai CH, Lee HL, Lin MH, Hsu JH, Chen CR, Shih TS, Liao AY, Chung YT, 2012. Epidemiological study of health hazards among workers handling engineered nanomaterials. J. Nanopart. Res 14, 1–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11051-012-0878-5.22448125 [Google Scholar]
  112. Liou SH, Tsai CSJ, Pelclova D, Schubauer-Berigan MK, Schulte PA, 2015. Assessing the first wave of epidemiological studies of nanomaterial workers. J. Nanopart. Res 17, 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11051-015-3219-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  113. Liou SH, Chen YC, Liao HY, Wang CJ, Chen JS, Lee HL, 2016. Increased levels of oxidative stress biomarkers in metal oxides nanomaterial-handling workers. Biomarkers 21, 600–606. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/1354750X.2016.1160432. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  114. Liou SH, Wu WT, Liao HY, Chen CY, Tsai CY, Jung WT, Lee HL, 2017. Global DNA methylation and oxidative stress biomarkers in workers exposed to metal oxide nanoparticles. J. Hazard. Mater 331, 329–335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.02.042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  115. Liu X, Sun J, 2013. Time-course effects of intravenously administrated silica nanoparticles on blood coagulation and endothelial function in rats. J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol 13, 222–228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1166/jnn.2013.6910. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  116. Lu X, Tian Y, Zhao Q, Jin T, Xiao S, Fan X, 2011. Integrated metabonomics analysis of the size-response relationship of silica nanoparticles-induced toxicity in mice. Nanotechnology 22, 055101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/22/5/055101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  117. Lu X, Miousse IR, Pirela SV, Moore JK, Melnyk S, Koturbash I, Demokritou P, 2016. In vivo epigenetic effects induced by engineered nanomaterials: a case study of copper oxide and laser printeremitted engineered nanoparticles. Nanotoxicology 10, 629–639. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2015.1108473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  118. Magdolenova Z, Drlickova M, Henjum K, Rundén-Pran E, Tulinska J, Bilanicova D, Pojana G, Kazimirova A, Barancokova M, Kuricova M, Liskova A, Staruchova M, Ciampor F, Vavra I, Lorenzo Y, Collins A, Rinna A, Fjellsbø L, Volkovova K, Marcomini A, Amiry-Moghaddam M, Dusinska M, 2015. Coating-dependent induction of cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of iron oxide nanoparticles. Nanotoxicology 9, 44–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2013.847505. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  119. Mahmoud A, Ezgi Ö, Merve A, Özhan G, 2016. In vitro toxicological assessment of magnesium oxide nanoparticle exposure in several mammalian cell types. Int. J. Toxicol 35, 429–437. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1091581816648624. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  120. Manno M, Viau C, in collaboration with, Cocker J, Colosio C, Lowry L, Mutti A, Nordberg M, Wang S, 2010. Biomonitoring for occupational health risk assessment (BOHRA). Toxicol. Lett 192, 3–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2009.05.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  121. Martins ADC Jr, Azevedo LF, de Souza Rocha CC, Carneiro MFH, Venancio VP, de Almeida MR, Antunes LMG, de Carvalho Hott R, Rodrigues JL, Ogunjimi AT, Adeyemi JA, Barbosa F Jr, 2017. Evaluation of distribution, redox parameters, and genotoxicity in Wistar rats co-exposed to silver and titanium dioxide nanoparticles. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health Part A 80, 1156–1165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15287394.2017.1357376. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  122. Matysiak M, Kapka-Skrzypczak L, Brzóska K, Gutleb AC, Kruszewski M, 2016. Proteomic approach to nanotoxicity. J. Proteom 137, 35–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jprot.2015.10.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  123. Maurer MM, Donohoe GC, Maleki H, Yi J, McBride C, Nurkiewicz TR, Valentine SJ, 2016. Comparative plasma proteomic studies of pulmonary TiO2 nanoparticle exposure in rats using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. J. Proteom 130, 85–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jprot.2015.09.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  124. Mercer RR, Scabilloni JF, Hubbs AF, Wang L, Battelli LA, McKinney W, Castranova V, Porter DW, 2013. Extrapulmonary transport of MWCNT following inhalation exposure. Part. Fibre Toxicol 10, 38 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-8977-10-38. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  125. Methner M, Hodson L, Geraci C, 2010a. Nanoparticle emission assessment technique (NEAT) for the identification and measurement of potential inhalation exposure to engineered nanomaterials—part. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg 7, 127–132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15459620903476355. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  126. Methner M, Hodson L, Dames A, Geraci C, 2010b. Nanoparticle Emission Assessment Technique (NEAT) for the identification and measurement of potential inhalation exposure to engineered nanomaterials-part b: results from 12 field studies. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg 7, 163–176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15459620903508066. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  127. Methner M, Beaucham C, Crawford C, Hodson L, Geraci C, 2012. Field application of the Nanoparticle Emission Assessment Technique (NEAT): task-based air monitoring during the processing of engineered nanomaterials (ENM) at four facilities. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg 9, 543–555. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2012.699388. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  128. Monopoli MP, Aberg C, Salvati A, Dawson KA, 2012. Biomolecular coronas provide the biological identity of nanosized materials. Nat. Nanotechnol 7, 779–786. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2012.207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  129. Moretto A, 2015. Exposure assessment for chemical and physical agents. Handb. Clin. Neurol 131, 47–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-62627-1.00004-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  130. Müller L, Steiner SK, Rodriguez-Lorenzo L, Petri-Fink A, Rothen-Rutishauser B, Latzin P, 2018. Exposure to silver nanoparticles affects viability and function of natural killer cells, mostly via the release of ions. Cell Biol. Toxicol 34, 167–176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10565-017-9403-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  131. Murphy A, Casey A, Byrne G, Chambers G, Howe O, 2016. Silver nanoparticles induce pro-inflammatory gene expression and inflammasome activation in human monocytes. J. Appl. Toxicol 36, 1311–1320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.3315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  132. Mytych J, Zebrowski J, Lewinska A, Wnuk M, 2017. Prolonged effects of silver nanoparticles on p53/p21 pathway-mediated proliferation, DNA damage response, and methylation parameters in HT22 hippocampal neuronal cells. Mol. Neurobiol 54, 1285–1300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12035-016-9688-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  133. Nagano T, Higashisaka K, Kunieda A, Iwahara Y, Tanaka K, Nagano K, Abe Y, Kamada H, Tsunoda S, Nabeshi H, Yoshikawa T, Yoshioka Y, Tsutsumi Y, 2013. Liver-specific microRNAs as biomarkers of nanomaterial-induced liver damage. Nanotechnology 24, 405102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/24/40/405102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  134. Nalabotu SK, Kolli MB, Triest WE, Ma JY, Manne ND, Katta A, Addagarla HS, Rice KM, Blough ER, 2011. Intratracheal instillation of cerium oxide nanoparticles induces hepatic toxicity in male Sprague-Dawley rats. Int. J. Nanomed 6, 2327–2335. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S25119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  135. Nanosolutions, 2018. http://nanosolutionsfp7.com/nanosolutions-explained/ (Accessed 30 January 2018).
  136. Navya PN, Daima HK, 2016. Rational engineering of physicochemical properties of nanomaterials for biomedical applications with nanotoxicological perspectives. Nano Converg 3, 1 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40580-016-0064-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  137. Ng CT, Yong LQ, Hande MP, Ong CN, Yu LE, Bay BH, Baeg GH, 2017. Zinc oxide nanoparticles exhibit cytotoxicity and genotoxicity through oxidative stress responses in human lung fibroblasts and Drosophila melanogaster. Int. J. Nanomed 12, 1621–1637. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S124403. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  138. NIOSH, 2009. Approaches to Safe Nanotechnology: Managing the Health and Safety Concerns Associated With Engineered Nanomaterials U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Atlanta: (Accessed 30 January 2018).. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2009-125/pdfs/2009-125.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  139. NIOSH, 2013. Occupational Exposure to Carbon Nanotubes and Nanofibers U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH: In: https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2013-145/pdfs/2013-145.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  140. NIOSH, 2017. The NIOSH Occupational Exposure Banding Process: Guidance for the Evaluation of Chemical Hazards. External Review Draft U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Atlanta: (Accessed 31 January 2018).. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docket/review/docket290/pdfs/clean-cib-niosh-oebprocess-guidancefortheevaluationofchemicalhazards_3.8.17.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  141. Nurkiewicz TR, Porter DW, Hubbs AF, Cumpston JL, Chen BT, Frazer DG, Castranova V, 2008. Nanoparticle inhalation augments particle-dependent systemic microvascular dysfunction. Part. Fibre Toxicol 5, 1 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-8977-5-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  142. Oberdörster G, Yu CP, 1999. Lung dosimetry—considerations for noninhalation studies. Exp. Lung Res 25, 1–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/019021499270385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  143. Oberdӧrster G, Ferin J, Gelein R, Soderholm SC, Finkelstein J, 1992. Role of the alveolar macrophange in lung injury: studies with ultrafine particles. Environ. Health Perspect 97, 193–199. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3431353. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  144. Oberdörster G, Maynard A, Donaldson K, Castranova V, Fitzpatrick J, Ausman K, Carter J, Karn B, Kreyling W, Lai D, Olin S, Monteiro-Riviere N, Warheit D, Yang H, I.L.S.I. Research Foundation/Risk Science Institute Nanomaterial Toxicity Screening Working Group, 2005. Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: elements of a screening strategy. Part. Fibre Toxicol 2, 8 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-8977-2-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  145. OECD, 2017. Revised Guidance Document on Developing and Assessing Adverse Outcome Pathways. Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 184. 2013. ENM/JM/MONO, pp.6 (Accessed 30 January 2018).. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=env/jm/mono(2013)6&doclanguage=en.
  146. Öner D, Moisse M, Ghosh M, Duca RC, Poels K, Luyts K, Putzeys E, Cokic SM, Van Landuyt K, Vanoirbeek J, Lambrechts D, Godderis L, Hoet PH, 2017Epigenetic effects of carbon nanotubes in human monocytic cells. Mutagenesis 32, 181–191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mutage/gew053. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  147. Orecchioni M, Bedognetti D, Newman L, Fuoco C, Spada F, Hendrickx W, Marincola FM, Sgarrella F, Rodrigues AF, Ménard-Moyon C, Cesareni G, Kostarelos K, Bianco A, Delogu LG, 2017. Single-cell mass cytometry and transcriptome profiling reveal the impact of graphene on human immune cells. Nat.Commun 8, 1109 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01015-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  148. Osmond-McLeod MJ, Oytam Y, Kirby JK, Gomez-Fernandez L, Baxter B, McCall MJ, 2014. Dermal absorption and short-term biological impact in hairless mice from sunscreens containing zinc oxide nano- or larger particles. Nanotoxicology 8 (Suppl. 1), 72–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2013.855832. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  149. Pacurari M, Qian Y, Porter DW, Wolfarth M, Wan Y, Luo D, Ding M, Castranova V, Guo NL, 2011. Multi-walled carbon nanotube-induced gene expression in the mouse lung: association with lung pathology. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol 255, 18–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2011.05.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  150. Paino IM, Marangoni VS, de Oliveira Rde C, Antunes LM, Zucolotto V, 2012. Cyto and genotoxicity of gold nanoparticles in human hepatocellular carcinoma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Toxicol. Lett 215, 119–125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2012.09.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  151. Palomino-Schätzlein M, García H, Gutiérrez-Carcedo P, Pineda-Lucena A, Herance JR, 2017. Assessment of gold nanoparticles on human peripheral blood cells by metabolic profiling with 1H-NMR spectroscopy, a novel translational approach on a patient-specific basis. PLoS One 12, e0182985 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182985. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  152. Parayanthala Valappil M, Santhakumar S, Arumugam S, 2014. Determination of oxidative stress related toxicity on repeated dermal exposure of hydroxyapatite nanoparticles in rats. Int. J. Biomater 2014, 476942 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/476942. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  153. Park KH, Chhowalla M, Iqbal Z, Sesti F, 2003. Single-walled carbon nanotubes are a new class of ion channel blockers. J. Biol. Chem 278, 50212–50216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  154. Park EJ, Yoon J, Choi K, Yi J, Park K, 2009. Induction of chronic inflammation in mice treated with titanium dioxide nanoparticles by intratracheal instillation. Toxicology 260, 37–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2009.03.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  155. Park EJ, Kim H, Kim Y, Yi J, Choi K, Park K, 2010. Inflammatory responses may be induced by a single intratracheal instillation of iron nanoparticles in mice. Toxicology 275, 65–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2010.06.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  156. Park HS, Kim SJ, Lee TJ, Kim GY, Meang E, Hong JS, Kim SH, Koh SB,Hong SG, Sun YS, Kang JS, Kim YR, Kim MK, Jeong J, Lee JK, Son WC,Park JH, 2014. A 90-day study of sub-chronic oral toxicity of 20 nm positively charged zinc oxide nanoparticles in Sprague Dawley rats. Int. J. Nanomed 9, 93–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S57927. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  157. Parveen A, Rizvi SH, Gupta A, Singh R, Ahmad I, Mahdi F, Mahdi AA, 2012. NMR-based metabonomics study of sub-acute hepatotoxicity induced by silica nanoparticles in rats after intranasal exposure. Cell. Mol. Biol. (Noisy-le-grand) 58, 196–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1170/T941. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  158. Patil NA, Gade WN, Deobagkar DD, 2016. Epigenetic modulation upon exposure of lung fibroblasts to TiO2 and ZnO nanoparticles: alterations in DNA methylation. Int. J. Nanomed 11, 4509–4519. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  159. Pelclova D, Barosova H, Kukutschova J, Zdimal V, Navratil T, Fenclova Z, Vlckova S, Schwarz J, Zikova N, Kacer P, Komarc M, Belacek J, Zakharov S, 2015. Raman microspectroscopy of exhaled breath condensate and urine in workers exposed to fine and nano TiO2 particles: a cross-sectional study. J. Breath Res 9, 036008 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1752-7155/9/3/036008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  160. Pelclova D, Zdimal V, Kacer P, Fenclova Z, Vlckova S, Syslova K, Navratil T, Schwarz J, Zikova N, Barosova H, Turci F, Komarc M, Pelcl T, Belacek J, Kukutschova J, Zakharov S, 2016a. Oxidative stress markers are elevated in exhaled breath condensate of workers exposed to nanoparticles during iron oxide pigment production. J. Breath Res 10, 016004 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1752-7155/10/1/016004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  161. Pelclova D, Zdimal V, Fenclova Z, Vlckova S, Turci F, Corazzari I, Kacer P, Schwarz J, Zikova N, Makes O, Syslova K, Komarc M, Belacek J, Navratil T, Machajova M, Zakharov S, 2016b. Markers of oxidative damage of nucleic acids and proteins among workers exposed to TiO2 (nano) particles. Occup. Environ. Med 73, 110–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2015-103161. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  162. Pelclova D, Zdimal V, Kacer P, Fenclova Z, Vlckova S, Komarc M, Navratil T, Schwarz J, Zikova N, Makes O, Syslova K, Belacek J, Zakharov S, 2016c. Leukotrienes in exhaled breath condensate and fractional exhaled nitric oxide in workers exposed to TiO2 nanoparticles. J. Breath Res 10, 036004 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1752-7155/10/3/036004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  163. Pelclova D, Zdimal V, Kacer P, Zikova N, Komarc M, Fenclova Z, Vlckova S, Schwarz J, Makeš O, Syslova K, Navratil T, Turci F, Corazzari I, Zakharov S, Bello D, 2017a. Markers of lipid oxidative damage in the exhaled breath condensate of nano TiO2 production workers. Nanotoxicology 11, 52–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2016.1262921. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  164. Pelclova D, Zdimal V, Kacer P, Komarc M, Fenclova Z, Vlckova S, Zikova N, Schwarz J, Makes O, Navratil T, Zakharov S, Bello D, 2017b. Markers of lipid oxidative damage among office workers exposed intermittently to air pollutants including nanoTiO2 particles. Rev. Environ. Health 32, 193–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2016-0030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  165. Peschansky VJ, Wahlestedt C, 2014. Non-coding RNAs as direct and indirect modulators of epigenetic regulation. Epigenetics 9, 3–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.4161/epi.27473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  166. Peters A, Rückerl R, Cyrys J, 2011. Lessons from air pollution epidemiology for studies of engineered nanomaterials. J. Occup. Environ. Med 53, S8–S13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0b013e31821ad5c0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  167. Phuyal S, Kasem M, Knittelfelder O, Sharma A, Fonseca DM, Vebraite V, Shaposhnikov S, Slupphaug G, Skaug V, Zienolddiny S, 2018. Characterization of the proteome and lipidome profiles of human lung cells after low dose and chronic exposure to multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Nanotoxicology 12, 138–152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2018.1425500. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  168. Pietroiusti A, Stockmann-Juvala H, Lucaroni F, Savolainen K, 2018. Nanomaterial exposure, toxicity, and impact on human health. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev.: Nanomed. Nanobiotechnol e1513 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wnan.1513. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  169. Pisani C, Gaillard JC, Nouvel V, Odorico M, Armengaud J, Prat O, 2015. High-throughput, quantitative assessment of the effects of low-dose silica nanoparticles on lung cells: grasping complex toxicity with a great depth of field. BMC Genomics 16, 315 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12864-015-1521-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  170. Porter DW, Wu N, Hubbs AF, Mercer RR, Funk K, Meng F, Li J, Wolfarth MG, Battelli L, Friend S, Andrew M, Hamilton R Jr., Sriram K, Yang F, Castranova V, Holian A, 2013. Differential mouse pulmonary dose and time course responses to titanium dioxide nanospheres and nanobelts. Toxicol. Sci 131, 179–193. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfs261. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  171. Prow TW, Grice JE, Lin LL, Faye R, Butler M, Becker W, Wurm EM, Yoong C, Robertson TA, Soyer HP, Roberts MS, 2011. Nanoparticles and microparticles for skin drug delivery. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev 63, 470–491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2011.01.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  172. Qian Y, Zhang J, Hu Q, Xu M, Chen Y, Hu G, Zhao M, Liu S, 2015. Silver nanoparticle-induced hemoglobin decrease involves alteration of histone 3 methylation status. Biomaterials 70, 12–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2015.08.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  173. Reddy AR, Rao MV, Krishna DR, Himabindu V, Reddy YN, 2011. Evaluation of oxidative stress and anti-oxidant status in rat serum following exposure of carbon nanotubes. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol 59, 251–257. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2010.10.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  174. Renwick LC, Donaldson K, Clouter A, 2001. Impairment of alveolar macrophage phagocytosis by ultrafine particles. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol 172, 119–127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/taap.2001.9128. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  175. Riebeling C, Wiemann M, Schnekenburger J, Kuhlbusch TA, Wohlleben W, Luch A, Haase A, 2016. A redox proteomics approach to investigate the mode of action of nanomaterials. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol 299, 24–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2016.01.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  176. Rittinghausen S, Hackbarth A, Creutzenberg O, Ernst H, Heinrich U, Leonhardt A, Schaudien D, 2014. The carcinogenic effect of various multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) after intraperitoneal injection in rats. Part. Fibre Toxicol 11, 59 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12989-014-0059-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  177. Ritz S, Schöttler S, Kotman N, Baier G, Musyanovych A, Kuharev J, Landfester K, Schild H, Jahn O, Tenzer S, Mailänder V, 2015. Protein corona of nanoparticles: distinct proteins regulate the cellular uptake. Biomacromolecules 16, 1311–1321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.5b00108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  178. Robertson DG, Watkins PB, Reily MD, 2011. Metabolomics in toxicology: preclinical and clinical applications. Toxicol. Sci 120, S146–S170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfq358. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  179. Roco MC, 1997. Introduction, WTEC Workshop Report on R&D Status and Trends in Nanoparticles, Nanostructured Materials, and Nanodevices in the United States World Technology Evaluation Center (WTEC), Baltimore: (Accessed 30 January 2018). http://www.wtec.org/loyola/pdf/nanousws.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  180. Sadiq R, Bhalli JA, Yan J, Woodruff RS, Pearce MG, Li Y, Mustafa T, Watanabe F, Pack LM, Biris AS, Khan QM, Chen T, 2012. Genotoxicity of TiO2 anatase nanoparticles in B6C3F1 male mice evaluated using pig-a and flow cytometric micronucleus assays. Mutat. Res 745, 65–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mrgentox.2012.02.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  181. Sargent LM, Porter DW, Staska LM, Hubbs AF, Lowry DT, Battelli L, Siegrist KJ, Kashon ML, Mercer RR, Bauer AK, Chen BT, Salisbury JL, Frazer D, McKinney W, Andrew M, Tsuruoka S, Endo M, Fluharty KL, Castranova V, Reynolds SH, 2014. Promotion of lung adenocarcinoma following inhalation exposure to multi-walled carbon nanotubes. Part. Fibre Toxicol 11 (3). http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1743-8977-11-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  182. Sarkar A, Das J, Manna P, Sil PC, 2011. Nano-copper induces oxidative stress and apoptosis in kidney via both extrinsic and intrinsic pathways. Toxicology 290, 208–217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2011.09.086. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  183. Sayes CM, Wahi R, Kurian PA, Liu Y, West JL, Ausman KD, Warheit DB, Colvin VL, 2006. Correlating nanoscale titania structure with toxicity: a cytotoxicity and inflammatory response study with human dermal fibroblasts and human lung epithelial cells. Toxicol. Sci 92, 174–185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfj197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  184. Schmid O, Stoeger T, 2016. Surface area is the biologically most effective metric for acute nanoparticle toxicity of the lung. J. Aerosol. Sci 99, 133–143. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2015.12.006. [Google Scholar]
  185. Schulte PA, Hauser JE, 2012. The use of biomarkers in occupational health research, practice, and policy. Toxicol. Lett 213, 91–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2011.03.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  186. Schulte PA, Smith A, et al. , 2011. Ethical issues in molecular epidemiologic research. In: Rothman (Ed.), Molecular Epidemiology: Principles and Practices International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, pp. 9–21. [Google Scholar]
  187. Schulte PA, Talaska G, 1995. Validity criteria for the use of biological markers of exposure to chemical agents in environmental epidemiology. Toxicology 101, 73–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0300-483X(95)03020-G. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  188. Schulte PA, Iavicoli I, Rantanen JH, Dahmann D, Iavicoli S, Pipke R, Guseva Canu I, Boccuni F, Ricci M, Polci ML, Sabbioni E, Pietroiusti A, Mantovani E, 2016. Assessing the protection of the nanomaterial workforce. Nanotoxicology 10, 1013–1019. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17435390.2015.1132347. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  189. Semmler-Behnke M, Kreyling WG, Lipka J, Fertsch S, Wenk A, Takenaka S, Schmid G, Brandau W, 2008. Biodistribution of 1.4- and 18-nm gold particles in rats. Small 4, 2108–2111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smll.200800922. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  190. Shrivastava R, Kushwaha P, Bhutia YC, Flora S, 2016. Oxidative stress following exposure to silver and gold nanoparticles in mice. Toxicol. Ind. Health 32, 1391–1404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0748233714562623. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  191. Shvedova AA, Kisin ER, Mercer R, Murray AR, Johnson VJ, Potapovich AI, Tyurina YY, Gorelik O, Arepalli S, Schwegler-Berry D, Hubbs AF, Antonini J, Evans DE, Ku BK, Ramsey D, Maynard A, Kagan VE, Castranova V, Baron P, 2005. Unusual inflammatory and fibrogenic pulmonary responses to single-walled carbon nanotubes in mice. Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell. Mol. Physiol 289, L698–L708. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/ajplung.00084.2005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  192. Shvedova AA, Yanamala N, Kisin ER, Khailullin TO, Birch ME, Fatkhutdinova LM, 2016. Integrated analysis of dysregulated ncRNA and mRNA expression profiles in humans exposed to carbon nanotubes. PLoS One 11, e0150628 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150628. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  193. Shyamasundar S, Ng CT, Yung LY, Dheen ST, Bay BH, 2015. Epigenetic mechanisms in nanomaterial-induced toxicity. Epigenomics 7, 395–411. http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/epi.15.3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  194. Sierra MI, Valdés A, Fernández AF, Torrecillas R, Fraga MF, 2016. The effect of exposure to nanoparticles and nanomaterials on the mammalian epigenome. Int. J. Nanomed 11, 6297–6306. http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IJN.S120104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  195. Singh SP, Kumari M, Kumari SI, Rahman MF, Mahboob M, Grover P, 2013a. Toxicity assessment of manganese oxide micro and nanoparticles in Wistar rats after 28 days of repeated oral exposure. J. Appl. Toxicol 33, 1165–1179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.2887. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  196. Singh SP, Rahman MF, Murty US, Mahboob M, Grover P, 2013b. Comparative study of genotoxicity and tissue distribution of nano and micron sized iron oxide in rats after acute oral treatment. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol 266, 56–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2012.10.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  197. Snyder-Talkington BN, Dymacek J, Porter DW, Wolfarth MG, Mercer RR, Pacurari M, Denvir J, Castranova V, Qian Y, Guo NL, 2013. System-based identification of toxicity pathways associated with multi-walled carbon nanotube-induced pathological responses. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol 272, 47–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2013.06.026. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  198. Snyder-Talkington BN, Dong C, Zhao X, Dymacek J, Porter DW, Wolfarth MG, Castranova V, Qian Y, Guo NL, 2015. Multi-walled carbon nanotube-induced gene expression in vitro: concordance with in vivo studies. Toxicology 328, 66–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2014.12.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  199. Snyder-Talkington BN, Dong C, Sargent LM, Porter DW, Staska LM, Hubbs AF,Raese R, McKinney W, Chen BT, Battelli L, Lowry DT, Reynolds SH, Castranova V, Qian Y, Guo NL, 2016. mRNAs and miRNAs in whole blood associated with lung hyperplasia, fibrosis, and bronchiolo-alveolar adenoma and adenocarcinoma after multi-walled carbon nanotube inhalation exposure in mice. J. Appl. Toxicol 236, 161–174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.3157. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  200. Soares T, Ribeiro D, Proença C, Chisté RC, Fernandes E, Freitas M, 2016. Size-dependent cytotoxicity of silver nanoparticles in human neutrophils assessed by multiple analytical approaches. Life Sci 145, 247–254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2015.12.046. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  201. Song MF, Li YS, Kasai H, Kawai K, 2012. Metal nanoparticle-induced micronuclei and oxidative DNA damage in mice. J. Clin. Biochem. Nutr 50, 211–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.3164/jcbn.11-70. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  202. Soni D, Gandhi D, Tarale P, Bafana A, Pandey RA, Sivanesan S, 2017. Oxidative stress and genotoxicity of zinc oxide nanoparticles to pseudomonas species, human promyelocytic leukemic (HL-60), and blood cells. Biol. Trace Elem. Res 178, 218–227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12011-016-0921-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  203. Srinivas A, Rao PJ, Selvam G, Murthy PB, Reddy PN, 2011. Acute inhalation toxicity of cerium oxide nanoparticles in rats. Toxicol. Lett 205, 105–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2011.05.1027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  204. Srinivas A, Rao PJ, Selvam G, Goparaju A, Murthy PB, Reddy PN, 2012Oxidative stress and inflammatory responses of rat following acute inhalation exposure to iron oxide nanoparticles. Hum. Exp. Toxicol 31, 1113–1131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0960327112446515. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  205. Stirling PA, 2018. The Nanotechnology Revolution: A Global Bibliographic Perspective CRC Press, Taylor Francis Group. [Google Scholar]
  206. Stone V, Miller MR, Clift MJD, Elder A, Mills NL, Møller P, Schins RPF, Vogel U, Kreyling WG, Alstrup, Jensen K, Kuhlbusch TAJ, Schwarze PE, Hoet P, Pietroiusti A, De Vizcaya-Ruiz A, Baeza-Squiban A, Teixeira JP, Tran CL, Cassee FR, 2017. Nanomaterials versus ambient ultrafine particles: an opportunity to exchange toxicology knowledge. Environ. Health Perspect 125, 106002 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP424. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  207. Sumner SC, Fennell TR, Snyder RW, Taylor GF, Lewin AH, 2010. Distribution of carbon-14 labeled C60 ([14C]C60) in the pregnant and in the lactating dam and the effect of C60 exposure on the biochemical profile of urine. J. Appl. Toxicol 30, 354–360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jat.1503. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  208. Sundarraj K, Raghunath A, Panneerselvam L, Perumal E, 2017. Iron oxide nanoparticles modulate heat shock proteins and organ specific markers expression in mice male accessory organs. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol 317, 12–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2017.01.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  209. Sung JH, Ji JH, Park JD, Yoon JU, Kim DS, Jeon KS, Song MY, Jeong J, Han BS, Han JH, Chung YH, Chang HK, Lee JH, Cho MH, Kelman BJ, Yu IJ, 2009. Subchronic inhalation toxicity of silver nanoparticles. Toxicol. Sci 108, 452–461. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfn246. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  210. Tabish AM, Poels K, Byun HM, Luyts K, Baccarelli AA, Martens J, Kerkhofs S, Seys S, Hoet P, Godderis L, 2017. Changes in DNA methylation in mouse lungs after a single intra-tracheal administration of nanomaterials. PLoS One 12, e0169886 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169886. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  211. Takenaka S, Karg E, Roth C, Schulz H, Ziesenis A, Heinzmann U, Schramel P, Heyder J, 2001. Pulmonary and systemic distribution of inhaled ultrafine silver particles in rats. Environ. Health Perspect 109, 547–551. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3454667. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  212. Takenaka S, Karg E, Kreyling WG, Lentner B, Möller W, Behnke-Semmler M, Jennen L, Walch A, Michalke B, Schramel P, Heyder J, Schulz H, 2006. Distribution pattern of inhaled ultrafine gold particles in the rat lung. Inhal. Toxicol 18, 733–740. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08958370600748281. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  213. Tang M, Zhang T, Xue Y, Wang S, Huang M, Yang Y, Lu M, Lei H, Kong L, Yuepu P, 2010. Dose dependent in vivo metabolic characteristics of titanium dioxide nanoparticles. J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol 10, 8575–8583. http://dx.doi.org/10.1166/jnn.2010.2482. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  214. Tang M, Zhang T, Xue Y, Wang S, Huang M, Yang Y, Lu M, Lei H, Kong L, Wang Y, Pu Y, 2011. Metabonomic studies of biochemical changes in the serum of rats by intratracheally instilled TiO2 nanoparticles. J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol 11, 3065–3074. http://dx.doi.org/10.1166/jnn.2011.3604. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  215. Tarasova NK, Gallud A, Ytterberg AJ, Chernobrovkin A, Aranzaes JR, Astruc D, Antipov A, Fedutik Y, Fadeel B, Zubarev RA, 2017. Cytotoxic and prion flammatory effects of metal-based nanoparticles on THP-1 monocytes characterized by combined proteomics approaches. J. Proteome Res 16, 689–697. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jproteome.6b00747. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  216. Tavares A, Louro H, Antunes S, Quarre´ S, Simar S, De Temmerman PJ, Verleysen E, Mast J, Jensen KA, Norppa H, Nesslany F, Silva MJ, 2014. Genotoxicity evaluation of nanosized titanium dioxide, synthetic amorphous silica and multi-walled carbon nanotubes in human lymphocytes. Toxicol. In Vitro 28, 60–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tiv.2013.06.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  217. Thiruvengadam M, Rajakumar G, Chung IM, 2018. Nanotechnology: current uses and future applications in the food industry. Biotechnology 8, 74 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13205-018-1104-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  218. Tiwari DK, Jin T, Behari J, 2011. Dose-dependent in vivo toxicity assessment of silver nanoparticle in Wistar rats. Toxicol. Mech. Methods 21, 13–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/15376516.2010.529184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  219. Trouiller B, Reliene R, Westbrook A, Solaimani P, Schiestl RH, 2009. Titanium dioxide nanoparticles induce DNA damage and genetic instability in vivo in mice. Cancer Res 69, 8784–8789. http://dx.doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-09-2496. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  220. Uboldi C, Urbán P, Gilliland D, Bajak E, Valsami-Jones E, Ponti J, Rossi F, 2016. Role of the crystalline form of titanium dioxide nanoparticles: rutile, and not anatase, induces toxic effects in Balb/3T3 mouse fibroblasts. Toxicol. In Vitro 31, 137–145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tiv.2015.11.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  221. Vasantharaja D, Ramalingam V, Aadinaath, Reddy GG, 2015. Titanium dioxide nanoparticles induced alteration in haematological indices of adult male wistar rats. J. Acad. Ind. Res 3, 632–635. [Google Scholar]
  222. Villalta PW, Balbo S, 2017. The future of DNA adductomic analysis. Int. J. Mol. Sci 18, 1870 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms18091870. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  223. Vlaanderen J, Pronk A, Rothman N, Hildesheim A, Silverman D, Hosgood HD, Spaan S, Kuijpers E, Godderis L, Hoet P, Lan Q, Vermeulen R, 2017. A cross-sectional study of changes in markers of immunological effects and lung health due to exposure to multi-walled carbon nanotubes. Nanotoxicology 11, 395–404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2017.1308031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  224. Wu WT, Liao HY, Chung YT, Li WF, Tsou TC, Li LA, Lin MH, Ho JJ, Wu TN, Liou SH, 2014. Effect of nanoparticles exposure on fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) in workers exposed to nanomaterials. Int. J. Mol. Sci 15, 878–894. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms15010878. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  225. Xia T, Hamilton RF, Bonner JC, Crandall ED, Elder A, Fazlollahi F, Girtsman TA, Kim K, Mitra S, Ntim SA, Orr G, Tagmount M, Taylor AJ, Telesca D,Tolic A, Vulpe CD, Walker AJ, Wang X, Witzmann FA, Wu N, Xie Y, Zink JI, Nel A, Holian A, 2013. Interlaboratory evaluation of in vitro cytotoxicity and inflammatory responses to engineered nanomaterials: the NIEHS nano GO consortium. Environ. Health Perspect 121, 683–690. http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1306561. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  226. Xie J, Dong W, Liu R, Wang Y, Li Y, 2018. Research on the hepatotoxicity mechanism of citrate-modified silver nanoparticles based on metabolomics and proteomics. Nanotoxicology 12, 18–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2017.1415389. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  227. Yazdimamaghani M, Moos PJ, Ghandehari H, 2017. Global gene expression analysis of macrophage response induced by nonporous and porous silica nanoparticles. Nanomedicine 14, 533–545. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nano.2017.11.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  228. Yu LE, Yung LYL, Ong CN, Tan YL, Balasubramaniam KS, Hartono D, Shui GH, Wenk MR, Ong WY, 2007. Translocation and effects of gold nanoparticles after inhalation exposure in rats. Nanotoxicology 1, 235–242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17435390701763108. [Google Scholar]
  229. Zhang R, Dai Y, Zhang X, Niu Y, Meng T, Li Y, Duan H, Bin P, Ye M, Jia X,Shen M, Yu S, Yang X, Gao W, Zheng Y, 2014. Reduced pulmonary function and increased pro-inflammatory cytokines in nanoscale carbon black-exposed workers. Part. Fibre Toxicol 11, 73 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12989-014-0073-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  230. Zhao Y, Sun H, Wang H, 2016. Long noncoding RNAs in DNA methylation: new players stepping into the old game. Cell Biosci 6, 45 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13578-016-0109-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  231. Zhao L, Zhu Y, Chen Z, Xu H, Zhou J, Tang S, Xu Z, Kong F, Li X, Zhang Y, Li X, Zhang J, Jia G, 2018. Cardiopulmonary effects induced by occupational exposure to titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Nanotoxicology 11, 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2018.1425502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  232. Zhu MT, Feng WY, Wang Y, Wang B, Wang M, Ouyang H, Zhao YL, Chai ZF, 2009. Particokinetics and extrapulmonary translocation of intratracheally instilled ferric oxide nanoparticles in rats and the potential health risk assessment. Toxicol. Sci 107, 342–351. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfn245. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  233. Ziemba B, Matuszko G, Appelhans D, Voit B, Bryszewska M, Klajnert B, 2012Genotoxicity of poly(propylene imine) dendrimers. Biopolymers 97, 642–648. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bip.22056. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES