Is aggregated synthetic amorphous silica toxicologically relevant?


Journal

Particle and fibre toxicology
ISSN: 1743-8977
Titre abrégé: Part Fibre Toxicol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101236354

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
03 01 2020
Historique:
received: 23 09 2019
accepted: 10 12 2019
entrez: 5 1 2020
pubmed: 5 1 2020
medline: 15 12 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The regulatory definition(s) of nanomaterials (NMs) frequently uses the term 'agglomerates and aggregates' (AA) despite the paucity of evidence that AA are significantly relevant from a nanotoxicological perspective. This knowledge gap greatly affects the safety assessment and regulation of NMs, such as synthetic amorphous silica (SAS). SAS is used in a large panel of industrial applications. They are primarily produced as nano-sized particles (1-100 nm in diameter) and considered safe as they form large aggregates (> 100 nm) during the production process. So far, it is indeed believed that large aggregates represent a weaker hazard compared to their nano counterpart. Thus, we assessed the impact of SAS aggregation on in vitro cytotoxicity/biological activity to address the toxicological relevance of aggregates of different sizes. We used a precipitated SAS dispersed by different methods, generating 4 ad-hoc suspensions with different aggregate size distributions. Their effect on cell metabolic activity, cell viability, epithelial barrier integrity, total glutathione content and, IL-8 and IL-6 secretion were investigated after 24 h exposure in human bronchial epithelial (HBE), colon epithelial (Caco2) and monocytic cells (THP-1). We observed that the de-aggregated suspension (DE-AGGR), predominantly composed of nano-sized aggregates, induced stronger effects in all the cell lines than the aggregated suspension (AGGR). We then compared DE-AGGR with 2 suspensions fractionated from AGGR: the precipitated fraction (PREC) and the supernatant fraction (SuperN). Very large aggregates in PREC were found to be the least cytotoxic/biologically active compared to other suspensions. SuperN, which contains aggregates larger in size (> 100 nm) than in DE-AGGR but smaller than PREC, exhibited similar activity as DE-AGGR. Overall, aggregation resulted in reduced toxicological activity of SAS. However, when comparing aggregates of different sizes, it appeared that aggregates > 100 nm were not necessarily less cytotoxic than their nano-sized counterparts. This study suggests that aggregates of SAS are toxicologically relevant for the definition of NMs.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The regulatory definition(s) of nanomaterials (NMs) frequently uses the term 'agglomerates and aggregates' (AA) despite the paucity of evidence that AA are significantly relevant from a nanotoxicological perspective. This knowledge gap greatly affects the safety assessment and regulation of NMs, such as synthetic amorphous silica (SAS). SAS is used in a large panel of industrial applications. They are primarily produced as nano-sized particles (1-100 nm in diameter) and considered safe as they form large aggregates (> 100 nm) during the production process. So far, it is indeed believed that large aggregates represent a weaker hazard compared to their nano counterpart. Thus, we assessed the impact of SAS aggregation on in vitro cytotoxicity/biological activity to address the toxicological relevance of aggregates of different sizes.
RESULTS
We used a precipitated SAS dispersed by different methods, generating 4 ad-hoc suspensions with different aggregate size distributions. Their effect on cell metabolic activity, cell viability, epithelial barrier integrity, total glutathione content and, IL-8 and IL-6 secretion were investigated after 24 h exposure in human bronchial epithelial (HBE), colon epithelial (Caco2) and monocytic cells (THP-1). We observed that the de-aggregated suspension (DE-AGGR), predominantly composed of nano-sized aggregates, induced stronger effects in all the cell lines than the aggregated suspension (AGGR). We then compared DE-AGGR with 2 suspensions fractionated from AGGR: the precipitated fraction (PREC) and the supernatant fraction (SuperN). Very large aggregates in PREC were found to be the least cytotoxic/biologically active compared to other suspensions. SuperN, which contains aggregates larger in size (> 100 nm) than in DE-AGGR but smaller than PREC, exhibited similar activity as DE-AGGR.
CONCLUSION
Overall, aggregation resulted in reduced toxicological activity of SAS. However, when comparing aggregates of different sizes, it appeared that aggregates > 100 nm were not necessarily less cytotoxic than their nano-sized counterparts. This study suggests that aggregates of SAS are toxicologically relevant for the definition of NMs.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31900181
doi: 10.1186/s12989-019-0331-3
pii: 10.1186/s12989-019-0331-3
pmc: PMC6942297
doi:

Substances chimiques

Suspensions 0
Silicon Dioxide 7631-86-9
Glutathione GAN16C9B8O

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1

Subventions

Organisme : European Research Council
ID : 814425
Pays : International

Références

Nanotoxicology. 2015 May;9(4):442-52
pubmed: 25033893
Mol Pharm. 2016 Jul 5;13(7):2164-71
pubmed: 26905216
Arch Toxicol. 2017 Sep;91(9):2967-3010
pubmed: 28573455
Environ Health Perspect. 2002 Aug;110(8):797-800
pubmed: 12153761
Sci Rep. 2017 Jun 19;7(1):3827
pubmed: 28630477
Anal Bioanal Chem. 2016 Jan;408(1):271-86
pubmed: 26507331
Nanotoxicology. 2013 May;7(3):274-93
pubmed: 22264143
Part Fibre Toxicol. 2010 Dec 03;7(1):39
pubmed: 21126379
Small. 2009 Apr;5(7):846-53
pubmed: 19288475
Nanomaterials (Basel). 2018 Dec 22;9(1):null
pubmed: 30583541
Toxicology. 2012 Apr 11;294(2-3):61-79
pubmed: 22349641
Cell Biol Int. 2015 Aug;39(8):881-90
pubmed: 25790433
Nanotoxicology. 2015;9(7):871-85
pubmed: 25672815
Part Fibre Toxicol. 2014 Feb 17;11:11
pubmed: 24529161
Nanomaterials (Basel). 2016 Feb 16;6(2):
pubmed: 28344290
J Nanobiotechnology. 2012 Jun 18;10:24
pubmed: 22709926
Toxicol Sci. 2016 Mar;150(1):40-53
pubmed: 26612840
Nat Protoc. 2017 Feb;12(2):355-371
pubmed: 28102836
Mutagenesis. 2017 Jan;32(1):181-191
pubmed: 28011750
Chem Res Toxicol. 2011 Feb 18;24(2):150-8
pubmed: 21171596
Drug Discov Today. 2012 Oct;17(19-20):1147-54
pubmed: 22772028
Arch Toxicol. 2016 Dec;90(12):2885-2916
pubmed: 27699444
Int J Nanomedicine. 2011;6:2821-35
pubmed: 22131828
Nanoscale Res Lett. 2013 Nov 21;8(1):496
pubmed: 24261419
Toxicol In Vitro. 2011 Oct;25(7):1343-52
pubmed: 21575712

Auteurs

Sivakumar Murugadoss (S)

Laboratory of Toxicology, Unit of Environment and Health, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.

Sybille van den Brule (S)

Louvain centre for Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, Institute of Experimental and Clinical Research, Université catholique de Louvain, 1200, Brussels, Belgium.

Frederic Brassinne (F)

Trace Elements and Nanomaterials, Sciensano, 1180, Uccle, Belgium.

Noham Sebaihi (N)

National Standards, FPS Economy, 1000, Brussels, Belgium.

Jorge Mejia (J)

Synthesis Irradiation and Analysis of Materials Platform (SIAM), University of Namur, Rue de Bruxelles 61, 5000, Namur, Belgium.

Stéphane Lucas (S)

LARN-NARILIS, University of Namur, Rue de Bruxelles 61, 5000, Namur, Belgium.

Jasmine Petry (J)

National Standards, FPS Economy, 1000, Brussels, Belgium.

Lode Godderis (L)

Laboratory for Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, Unit of Environment and Health, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
IDEWE, External Service for Prevention and Protection at work, Interleuvenlaan 58, 3001, Heverlee, Belgium.

Jan Mast (J)

Trace Elements and Nanomaterials, Sciensano, 1180, Uccle, Belgium.

Dominique Lison (D)

Louvain centre for Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, Institute of Experimental and Clinical Research, Université catholique de Louvain, 1200, Brussels, Belgium.

Peter H Hoet (PH)

Laboratory of Toxicology, Unit of Environment and Health, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. peter.hoet@kuleuven.be.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH