A template wizard for the cocreation of machine-readable data-reporting to harmonize the evaluation of (nano)materials.

Journal

Nature protocols

ISSN: 1750-2799

Titre abrégé: Nat Protoc

Pays: England

ID NLM: 101284307

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
16 May 2024

Historique:

received: 20 03 2023

accepted: 20 02 2024

medline: 17 5 2024

pubmed: 17 5 2024

entrez: 16 5 2024

Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Making research data findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (FAIR) is typically hampered by a lack of skills in technical aspects of data management by data generators and a lack of resources. We developed a Template Wizard for researchers to easily create templates suitable for consistently capturing data and metadata from their experiments. The templates are easy to use and enable the compilation of machine-readable metadata to accompany data generation and align them to existing community standards and databases, such as eNanoMapper, streamlining the adoption of the FAIR principles. These templates are citable objects and are available as online tools. The Template Wizard is designed to be user friendly and facilitates using and reusing existing templates for new projects or project extensions. The wizard is accompanied by an online template validator, which allows self-evaluation of the template (to ensure mapping to the data schema and machine readability of the captured data) and transformation by an open-source parser into machine-readable formats, compliant with the FAIR principles. The templates are based on extensive collective experience in nanosafety data collection and include over 60 harmonized data entry templates for physicochemical characterization and hazard assessment (cell viability, genotoxicity, environmental organism dose-response tests, omics), as well as exposure and release studies. The templates are generalizable across fields and have already been extended and adapted for microplastics and advanced materials research. The harmonized templates improve the reliability of interlaboratory comparisons, data reuse and meta-analyses and can facilitate the safety evaluation and regulation process for (nano) materials.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1038/s41596-024-00993-1 PMID: 38755447

pubmed: 38755447

doi: 10.1038/s41596-024-00993-1

pii: 10.1038/s41596-024-00993-1

doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

Informations de copyright

Références

Hofseth, L. J. Getting rigorous with scientific rigor. Carcinogenesis 39, 21–25 (2018).

pubmed: 28968787 doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgx085

Prager, E. M. et al. Improving transparency and scientific rigor in academic publishing. Brain Behav. 9, e01141 (2019).

pubmed: 30506879 doi: 10.1002/brb3.1141

Musen, M. A. et al. Modeling community standards for metadata as templates makes data FAIR. Sci. Data 9, 696 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-022-01815-3 (2022).

Hernandez-Boussard, T., Bozkurt, S., Ioannidis, J. P. A. & Shah, N. H. MINIMAR (MINimum Information for Medical AI Reporting): developing reporting standards for artificial intelligence in health care. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 27, 2011–2015 (2020).

doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa088

Papadiamantis, A. G. et al. Metadata stewardship in nanosafety research: community-driven organisation of metadata schemas to support fair nanoscience data. Nanomaterials 10, 1–49 (2020).

doi: 10.3390/nano10102033

Percie du Sert, N. et al. Reporting animal research: explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0. PLoS Biol. 18, e3000411 (2020).

pubmed: 32663221 pmcid: 7360025 doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000411

Moller, P. et al. Minimum Information for Reporting on the Comet Assay (MIRCA): recommendations for describing comet assay procedures and results. Nat. Protoc. 15, 3817–3826 (2020).

pubmed: 33106678 pmcid: 7688437 doi: 10.1038/s41596-020-0398-1

Faria, M. et al. Minimum information reporting in bio-nano experimental literature. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 777–785 (2018).

pubmed: 30190620 pmcid: 6150419 doi: 10.1038/s41565-018-0246-4

Chetwynd, A. J., Wheeler, K. E. & Lynch, I. Best practice in reporting corona studies: Minimum information about Nanomaterial Biocorona Experiments (MINBE). Nano Today 28, 100758 (2019).

pubmed: 32774443 pmcid: 7405976 doi: 10.1016/j.nantod.2019.06.004

Erickson, B. E. Nanomaterial characterization. Chem. Eng. N. Arch. 86, 25–26 (2008).

doi: 10.1021/cen-v086n050.p025

Drobne, D. Adding toxicological context to nanotoxicity study reporting using the NanoTox metadata list. Small 17, 2005622 (2021).

doi: 10.1002/smll.202005622

Elberskirch, L. et al. Digital research data: from analysis of existing standards to a scientific foundation for a modular metadata schema in nanosafety. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 19, 1 (2022).

pubmed: 34983569 pmcid: 8728981 doi: 10.1186/s12989-021-00442-x

Ramaswamy, V. & Ozcan, K. What is co-creation? An interactional creation framework and its implications for value creation. J. Bus. Res. 84, 196–205 (2018).

doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.027

Grönroos, C. & Voima, P. Critical service logic: making sense of value creation and co-creation. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 41, 133–150 (2013).

doi: 10.1007/s11747-012-0308-3

Sansone, S.-A. et al. Toward interoperable bioscience data. Nat. Genet. 44, 121–126 (2012).

pubmed: 22281772 pmcid: 3428019 doi: 10.1038/ng.1054

Sansone, S.-A., Rocca-Serra, P., Gonzalez-Beltran, Alejandra Johnson, D. & ISA community. ISA model and serialization specifications 1.0. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.163640 (2016).

Thomas, D. G. et al. ISA–TAB–Nano: a specification for sharing nanomaterial research data in spreadsheet-based format. BMC Biotechnol. 13, 2 (2013).

pubmed: 23311978 pmcid: 3598649 doi: 10.1186/1472-6750-13-2

Kochev, N. et al. Your spreadsheets can be FAIR: a tool and FAIRification workflow for the eNanoMapper database. Nanomaterials 10, 1908 (2020).

pubmed: 32987901 pmcid: 7601422 doi: 10.3390/nano10101908

Jeliazkova, N. et al. Towards FAIR nanosafety data. Nat. Nanotechnol. 16, 644–654 (2021).

pubmed: 34017099 doi: 10.1038/s41565-021-00911-6

Totaro, S., Crutzen, H. & Riego-Sintes, J. Data logging templates for the environmental, health and safety assessment of nanomaterials. European Commission https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC103178 (2017).

Gottardo, S. et al. GRACIOUS data logging templates for the environmental, health and safety assessment of nanomaterials. European Commission https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC117733 (2019).

Tanoli, Z. et al. Minimal information for chemosensitivity assays (MICHA): a next-generation pipeline to enable the FAIRification of drug screening experiments. Brief. Bioinform. 23, bbab350 (2022).

pubmed: 34472587 doi: 10.1093/bib/bbab350

Heller, S. R., McNaught, A., Pletnev, I., Stein, S. & Tchekhovskoi, D. InChI, the IUPAC international chemical identifier. J. Cheminform. 7, 23 (2015).

pubmed: 26136848 pmcid: 4486400 doi: 10.1186/s13321-015-0068-4

Scheffler, M. et al. FAIR data enabling new horizons for materials research. Nature 604, 635–642 (2022).

pubmed: 35478233 doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04501-x

Wilkinson, M. D. et al. The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci. Data 3, 160018 (2016).

pubmed: 26978244 pmcid: 4792175 doi: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18

Jeliazkova, N., Kochev, N. & Tancheva, G. in Data Integrity and Data Governance https://doi.org/10.5992/intechopen.1000857 (2023).

van Rijn, J. et al. European Registry of Materials: global, unique identifiers for (undisclosed) nanomaterials. J. Cheminform. 14, 57 (2022).

pubmed: 36002868 pmcid: 9400299 doi: 10.1186/s13321-022-00614-7

Lynch, I. et al. Can an InChI for nano address the need for a simplified representation of complex nanomaterials across experimental and nanoinformatics studies? Nanomaterials 10, 2493 (2020).

pubmed: 33322568 pmcid: 7764592 doi: 10.3390/nano10122493

Ammar, A., Evelo, C. & Willighagen, E. FAIR assessment of nanosafety data reusability with community standards. Prepr. ChemRxiv https://doi.org/10.26434/chemrxiv-2022-l8vk8-v2 (2022).

doi: 10.26434/chemrxiv-2022-l8vk8-v2

Berrios, D. C., Beheshti, A. & Costes, S. V. FAIRness and usability for open-access omics data systems. Annu. Symp. Proc. AMIA Symp. 2018, 232–241 (2018).

pubmed: 30815061

Rasmussen, K., Rauscher, H., Kearns, P., González, M. & Riego Sintes, J. Developing OECD test guidelines for regulatory testing of nanomaterials to ensure mutual acceptance of test data. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 104, 74–83 (2019).

pubmed: 30831158 pmcid: 6486396 doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2019.02.008

Xiarchos, I., Morozinis, A. K., Kavouras, P. & Charitidis, C. A. Nanocharacterization, materials modeling, and research integrity as enablers of sound risk assessment: designing responsible nanotechnology. Small 16, 2001590 (2020).

doi: 10.1002/smll.202001590

Steinhäuser, K. G. & Sayre, P. G. Reliability of methods and data for regulatory assessment of nanomaterial risks. NanoImpact 7, 66–74 (2017).

doi: 10.1016/j.impact.2017.06.001

Hendren, C. O., Lowry, G. V., Unrine, J. M. & Wiesner, M. R. A functional assay-based strategy for nanomaterial risk forecasting. Sci. Total Environ. 536, 1029–1037 (2015).

pubmed: 26188653 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.06.100

Gao, X. & Lowry, G. V. Progress towards standardized and validated characterizations for measuring physicochemical properties of manufactured nanomaterials relevant to nano health and safety risks. NanoImpact 9, 14–30 (2018).

doi: 10.1016/j.impact.2017.09.002

Geitner, N. K. et al. Harmonizing across environmental nanomaterial testing media for increased comparability of nanomaterial datasets. Environ. Sci. Nano 7, 13–36 (2020).

doi: 10.1039/C9EN00448C

Modena, M. M., Rühle, B., Burg, T. P. & Wuttke, S. Nanoparticle characterization: what to measure? Adv. Mater. 31, 1901556 (2019).

doi: 10.1002/adma.201901556

Rasmussen, K. et al. Physico-chemical properties of manufactured nanomaterials - Characterisation and relevant methods. An outlook based on the OECD testing programme. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 92, 8–28 (2018).

pubmed: 29074277 pmcid: 5817049 doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2017.10.019

Jeliazkova, N. Data entry template for material composition—part of eNanoMapper Template Wizard. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7751340 (2023).

Preliminary review of OECD test guidelines for their applicability to manufactured nanomaterials. ENV/JM/MONO(2009)21 OECD https://one.oecd.org/document/ENV/JM/MONO(2009)21/en/pdf (2009).

Guidance on sample preparation and dosimetry for the safety testing of manufactured nanomaterials. ENV/JM/MONO(2012)40 OECD https://one.oecd.org/document/ENV/JM/MONO(2012)40/en/pdf (2012).

Report of the OECD expert meeting on the physical chemical properties of manufactured nanomaterials and test guidelines. ENV/JM/MONO(2014)15 vol. 41 OECD https://one.oecd.org/document/ENV/JM/MONO(2014)15/en/pdf (2014).

Physical–chemical parameters: measurements and methods relevant for the regulation of nanomaterials. ENV/JM/MONO(2016)2 vol. 63 OECD https://one.oecd.org/document/ENV/JM/MONO(2016)63/en/pdf (2016).

Guiding principles for measurements and reporting for nanomaterials: physical chemical parameters. ENV/JM/MONO(2019)13 vol. 91 OECD https://one.oecd.org/document/env/jm/mono(2019)13/en/pdf (2019).

Ag Seleci, D. et al. Determining nanoform similarity via assessment of surface reactivity by abiotic and in vitro assays. NanoImpact 26, 100390 (2022).

pubmed: 35560290 doi: 10.1016/j.impact.2022.100390

Koltermann-Jülly, J. et al. Abiotic dissolution rates of 24 (nano)forms of 6 substances compared to macrophage-assisted dissolution and in vivo pulmonary clearance: grouping by biodissolution and transformation. NanoImpact 12, 29–41 (2018).

doi: 10.1016/j.impact.2018.08.005

Keller, J. G. et al. Predicting dissolution and transformation of inhaled nanoparticles in the lung using abiotic flow cells: the case of barium sulfate. Sci. Rep. 10, 458 (2020).

pubmed: 31949204 pmcid: 6965653 doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-56872-3

Keller, J. G. et al. Variation in dissolution behavior among different nanoforms and its implication for grouping approaches in inhalation toxicity. NanoImpact 23, 100341 (2021).

pubmed: 35559842 doi: 10.1016/j.impact.2021.100341

Li, Y., Fujita, M. & Boraschi, D. Endotoxin contamination in nanomaterials leads to the misinterpretation of immunosafety results. Front. Immunol. 8, 472 (2017).

pubmed: 28533772 pmcid: 5420554 doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00472

Longhin, E., Moschini, E., El Yamani, N. & Sanchez, M. Consolidated pre-validated guidance document on the determination of ENMs endotoxins content. Deliverable 4.4. RiskGONE https://riskgone.wp.nilu.no/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2022/02/RiskGONE-D4.4.pdf (2021).

Longhin, E. M., El Yamani, N., Rundén-Pran, E. & Dusinska, M. The alamar blue assay in the context of safety testing of nanomaterials. Front. Toxicol. 4, 981701 (2022).

pubmed: 36245792 pmcid: 9554156 doi: 10.3389/ftox.2022.981701

O’Brien, J., Wilson, I., Orton, T. & Pognan, F. Investigation of the alamar blue (resazurin) fluorescent dye for the assessment of mammalian cell cytotoxicity. Eur. J. Biochem. 267, 5421–5426 (2000).

pubmed: 10951200 doi: 10.1046/j.1432-1327.2000.01606.x

Guidance Document on Good In Vitro Method Practices (GIVIMP). OECD https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264304796-en (2018).

Ponti, J. et al. Interlaboratory comparison study of the colony forming efficiency assay for assessing cytotoxicity of nanomaterials. Jt. Res. Cent. https://doi.org/10.2788/406937 (2014).

Rundén-Pran, E. et al. The colony forming efficiency assay for toxicity testing of nanomaterials—modifications for higher throughput. Front. Toxicol. 4, 983316 (2022).

pubmed: 36157975 pmcid: 9489936 doi: 10.3389/ftox.2022.983316

Cowie, H. et al. Suitability of human and mammalian cells of different origin for the assessment of genotoxicity of metal and polymeric engineered nanoparticles. Nanotoxicology 9, 57–65 (2015).

pubmed: 25923348 doi: 10.3109/17435390.2014.940407

Vodenkova, S. et al. An optimized comet-based in vitro DNA repair assay to assess base and nucleotide excision repair activity. Nat. Protoc. 15, 3844–3878 (2020).

pubmed: 33199871 doi: 10.1038/s41596-020-0401-x

Guidance on the safety assessment of nanomaterials in cosmetics. Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety https://health.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2020-10/sccs_o_233_0.pdf (2020).

More, S. et al. Guidance on risk assessment of nanomaterials to be applied in the food and feed chain: human and animal health. EFSA J. 19, e06768 (2021).

pubmed: 34377190 pmcid: 8331059

More, S. et al. Guidance on technical requirements for regulated food and feed product applications to establish the presence of small particles including nanoparticles. EFSA J. 19, e06769 (2021).

pubmed: 34377191 pmcid: 8331058

El Yamani, N. et al. The miniaturized enzyme-modified comet assay for genotoxicity testing of nanomaterials. Front. Toxicol. 4, 986318 (2022).

pubmed: 36310692 pmcid: 9597874 doi: 10.3389/ftox.2022.986318

Magdolenova, Z., Lorenzo, Y., Collins, A. & Dusinska, M. Can standard genotoxicity tests be applied to nanoparticles? J. Toxicol. Environ. Heal. Part A 75, 800–806 (2012).

doi: 10.1080/15287394.2012.690326

Rajapakse, K., Drobne, D., Kastelec, D. & Marinsek-Logar, R. Experimental evidence of false-positive Comet test results due to TiO 2 particle—assay interactions. Nanotoxicology 7, 1043–1051 (2013).

pubmed: 22632608 doi: 10.3109/17435390.2012.696735

Bossa, C. et al. FAIRification of nanosafety data to improve applicability of (Q)SAR approaches: a case study on in vitro comet assay genotoxicity data. Comput. Toxicol. 20, 100190 (2021).

pubmed: 34820591 pmcid: 8591730 doi: 10.1016/j.comtox.2021.100190

El Yamani, N. et al. Hazard identification of nanomaterials: in silico unraveling of descriptors for cytotoxicity and genotoxicity. Nano Today 46, 101581 (2022).

doi: 10.1016/j.nantod.2022.101581

Collins, A. et al. Measuring DNA modifications with the comet assay: a compendium of protocols. Nat. Protoc. 18, 929–989 (2023).

pubmed: 36707722 pmcid: 10281087 doi: 10.1038/s41596-022-00754-y

El Yamani, N. et al. In vitro genotoxicity testing of four reference metal nanomaterials, titanium dioxide, zinc oxide, cerium oxide and silver: towards reliable hazard assessment. Mutagenesis 32, 117–126 (2017).

pubmed: 27838631 doi: 10.1093/mutage/gew060

El Yamani, N. et al. Lack of mutagenicity of TiO2 nanoparticles in vitro despite cellular and nuclear uptake. Mutat. Res. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen. 882, 503545 (2022).

doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2022.503545

Template for mammalian erythrocyte micronucleus test. FDA https://www.fda.gov/food/ingredients-additives-gras-packaging-guidance-documents-regulatory-information/template-mammalian-erythrocyte-micronucleus-test (2004).

Llewellyn, S. V. et al. Assessing the transferability and reproducibility of 3D in vitro liver models from primary human multi-cellular microtissues to cell-line based HepG2 spheroids. Toxicol. Vitr. 85, 105473 (2022).

doi: 10.1016/j.tiv.2022.105473

Test no. 487: in vitro mammalian cell micronucleus test. OECD https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264264861-en (2016).

Study report and preliminary guidance on the adaptation of the in vitro micronucleus assay (OECD TG 487) for testing of manufactured nanomaterials ENV/CBC/MONO(2022)15. series on testing and assessment vol. 359. OECD https://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/series-testing-assessment-publications-number.htm .

Test no. 476: in vitro mammalian cell gene mutation tests using the Hprt and xprt genes. OECD https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/test-no-476-in-vitro-mammalian-cell-gene-mutation-tests-using-the-hprt-and-xprt-genes_9789264264809-en , https://doi.org/10.1787/20745788 (2016).

Doak, S. H. et al. Mechanistic influences for mutation induction curves after exposure to DNA-reactive carcinogens. Cancer Res. 67, 3904–3911 (2007).

pubmed: 17440105 doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-4061

Johnson, G. E. et al. Non-linear dose–response of DNA-reactive genotoxins: recommendations for data analysis. Mutat. Res. Toxicol. Environ. Mutagen. 678, 95–100 (2009).

doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2009.05.009

Guadagnini, R. et al. Toxicity screenings of nanomaterials: challenges due to interference with assay processes and components of classic in vitro tests. Nanotoxicology 9, 13–24 (2015).

pubmed: 23889211 doi: 10.3109/17435390.2013.829590

Kroll, A., Pillukat, M. H., Hahn, D. & Schnekenburger, J. Interference of engineered nanoparticles with in vitro toxicity assays. Arch. Toxicol. 86, 1123–1136 (2012).

pubmed: 22407301 doi: 10.1007/s00204-012-0837-z

Collins, A. R. et al. High-throughput toxicity screening and intracellular detection of nanomaterials. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Nanomed. Nanobiotechnol. https://doi.org/10.1002/wnan.1413 (2017).

doi: 10.1002/wnan.1413 pubmed: 27273980

Ostermann, M. et al. Label-free impedance flow cytometry for nanotoxicity screening. Sci. Rep. 10, 142 (2020).

pubmed: 31924828 pmcid: 6954202 doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-56705-3

Jemec, A., Mesarič, T., Sopotnik, M., Sepčić, K. & Drobne, D. in Nanomaterial Characterization 253–268 (John Wiley & Sons, 2016).

Taylor, C. F. et al. Promoting coherent minimum reporting guidelines for biological and biomedical investigations: the MIBBI project. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 889–896 (2008).

pubmed: 18688244 pmcid: 2771753 doi: 10.1038/nbt.1411

Sakurai, K., Kurtz, A., Stacey, G., Sheldon, M. & Fujibuchi, W. First proposal of minimum information about a cellular assay for regenerative medicine. Stem Cells Transl. Med. 5, 1345–1361 (2016).

pubmed: 27405781 pmcid: 5031183 doi: 10.5966/sctm.2015-0393

Karatzas, P. et al. Development of deep learning models for predicting the effects of exposure to engineered nanomaterials on Daphnia magna. Small 16, 2001080 (2020).

doi: 10.1002/smll.202001080

Test no. 202: Daphnia sp. acute immobilisation test. OECD https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264069947-en (2004).

Test no. 211: Daphnia magna Reproduction Test. OECD https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264185203-en (2012).

Fernández-Cruz, M. L. et al. Quality evaluation of human and environmental toxicity studies performed with nanomaterials—the GUIDEnano approach. Environ. Sci. Nano https://doi.org/10.1039/C7EN00716G (2018).

doi: 10.1039/C7EN00716G

Klimisch, H. J., Andreae, M. & Tillmann, U. A systematic approach for evaluating the quality of experimental toxicological and ecotoxicological data. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 25, 1–5 (1997).

pubmed: 9056496 doi: 10.1006/rtph.1996.1076

Exposure Scenario Library. IOM http://guidenano.iom-world.co.uk/ .

Rashid, S. et al. GRACIOUS release and exposure templates. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4665253 (2021).

Sanchez Jimenez, A. et al. Harmonization of release and exposure data collection for nanomaterials. Prep.

Perez-Riverol, Y. et al. The PRIDE database resources in 2022: a hub for mass spectrometry-based proteomics evidences. Nucleic Acids Res. 50, D543–D552 (2022).

pubmed: 34723319 doi: 10.1093/nar/gkab1038

Additives, E. P. on F. et al. Safety assessment of titanium dioxide (E171) as a food additive. EFSA J. 19, e06585 (2021).

Canada, H. State of the science of titanium dioxide (TiO2) as a food additive. LJMU https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2022/sc-hc/H164-341-2022-eng.pdf (2022).

Corcho, O., Eriksson, M. & Kurowski, K. EOSC interoperability framework: report from the EOSC Executive Board Working Groups FAIR and Architecture. https://doi.org/10.2777/620649 (2021).

The New European Interoperability Framework. European Commission https://ec.europa.eu/isa2/eif_en/ .

Basei, G., Rauscher, H., Jeliazkova, N. & Hristozov, D. A methodology for the automatic evaluation of data quality and completeness of nanomaterials for risk assessment purposes. Nanotoxicology 16, 195–216 (2022).

pubmed: 35506346 doi: 10.1080/17435390.2022.2065222

Ellis, L. A. et al. Multigenerational exposures of Daphnia magna to pristine and aged silver nanoparticles: epigenetic changes and phenotypical ageing related effects. Small 16, 2000301 (2020).

doi: 10.1002/smll.202000301

Ellis, L.-J. A. et al. Multigenerational exposure to Nano-TiO

doi: 10.1002/anbr.202000083

Pem, B. et al. Biocompatibility assessment of up-and down-converting nanoparticles: implications of interferences with in vitro assays. Methods Appl. Fluoresc. 7, 014001 (2018).

pubmed: 30398160 doi: 10.1088/2050-6120/aae9c8

Vinković Vrček, I. et al. Does surface coating of metallic nanoparticles modulate their interference with in vitro assays? RSC Adv. 5, 70787–70807 (2015).

doi: 10.1039/C5RA14100A