We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Hazard assessment of nanomaterials using in vitro toxicity assays: Guidance on potential assay interferences and mitigating actions to avoid biased results
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers reviewed how nanomaterials — including microplastic and tire-wear particles — can interfere with standard lab toxicity tests, causing unreliable results, and developed a decision tree to help scientists design experiments that avoid or account for these false readings. This guidance is critical because more than 90% of papers published before 2014 didn't address this problem, meaning many early safety assessments may be flawed.
The movement towards an animal-free testing approach for risk assessment represents a key paradigm shift in toxicology. Risk assessment of engineered and anthropogenic nanoscale materials (NM) is dependent on reliable hazard characterization, which requires validated test methods and models, and increasingly on mechanistic insights into the mode of action. The properties that make NMs so advantageous for a wide range of commercial and industrial applications also pose a challenge when it comes to safety testing under in vitro and in chemico experimental settings. Their large reactive surface area makes NMs prone to interactions with assay reagents, readout signals, or intermediate steps of many test assays, leading to the potential for biased results and data inconsistencies, collectively referred to as interferences. Therefore, methods and protocols developed and validated for conventional chemicals often require adaptation and checking for reliability in NMs' toxicity assessment. This review presents the collected scientific knowledge on NMs-induced interferences for the most common in vitro toxicity assays and methods related to cytotoxicity, oxidative stress and inflammatory response evaluation. Our analysis of existing scientific literature showed that the challenge of NMs-induced interference was not explicitly addressed in more than 90% of the papers published up to 2014 reporting the safety and toxicity of NMs. In later years, increasing number of studies tackled the interference challenge in toxicity testing of NMs, which initiated exhaustive work on standardization and validation of existing regulatory-relevant in vitro test protocols and guidelines. Due to the specificity of the different NMs and the range of ways they can potentially interfere with in vitro assays, interference and fit-for purpose controls should be included for each NM type and method applied, unless label-free assays are selected. Here, we provide a decision tree to guide researchers on how to design experiments to avoid interferences during in vitro testing by taking appropriate mitigation actions and how to include proper interference controls in their experimental design where complete avoidance is not possible. The application of this decision tree will improve the reliability, comparability and reusability of in vitro toxicity data on engineered NMs or ENMs, increasing the relevance of in silico hazard data for use in risk assessment and in science-based risk governance of NMs. The approach is applicable more broadly also, to advanced materials and to hazard assessment of anthropogenic nanoscale materials such as microplastic and tyre-wear particles.
More Papers Like This
Can the impact of micro- and nanoplastics on human health really be assessed using in vitro models? A review of methodological issues
AI summary Read the abstract
This review examines whether lab-based cell studies can reliably predict how micro and nanoplastics affect human health. The authors found significant inconsistencies in how researchers choose plastic particle types, doses, and exposure methods, making it hard to compare results across studies. The paper calls for standardized testing protocols so that lab findings can more accurately reflect real-world microplastic exposure risks to people.
Screening and prioritization of nano- and microplastic particle toxicity studies for evaluating human health risks – development and application of a toxicity study assessment tool
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers developed a standardized tool to screen and rank toxicity studies on nano- and microplastics by quality and relevance, addressing a critical gap in how scientists evaluate which studies should inform human health risk assessments for these widespread plastic pollutants.
Confounding factors in nano and microplastic ecological risk assessment
AI summary Read the abstract
This review identified and discussed the major confounding factors in micro- and nanoplastic ecotoxicology research, including particle variability, contamination during testing, and inconsistent methodology. The authors highlighted how these confounders lead to discrepancies across studies and outlined best practices for improving data quality and comparability.
Analytical methodologies used for screening micro(nano)plastics in (eco)toxicity tests
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers reviewed how scientists analyze microplastics and nanoplastics in toxicity experiments, finding widespread inconsistency in how the particles are characterized before testing — including their size, shape, and chemical makeup. Better standardization of these measurements is essential for comparing results across studies and accurately assessing how microplastics harm living organisms.
Microplastics and nanoplastics: Exposure and toxicological effects require important analysis considerations
AI summary Read the abstract
This review highlights that while microplastics and nanoplastics have been found in human tissues and linked to several diseases, the actual toxic effects are still unclear because researchers use very different methods to study them. The authors call for standardized testing approaches so that results can be compared reliably, which is critical for determining what levels of exposure actually pose a risk to human health.
Research digests by email
When a large batch of papers lands in the Atlas, we read through it and send a short write-up of what stood out.