Synthetic amorphous silica (SAS) in its nanosized form is now used in food applications although the potential risks for human health have not been evaluated. In this study, genotoxicity and oxidative DNA damage of two pyrogenic (NM-202 and 203) and two precipitated (NM-200 and -201) nanosized SAS were investigated in vivo in rats following oral exposure. Male Sprague Dawley rats were exposed to 5, 10, or 20 mg/kg b.w./day for three days by gavage. DNA strand breaks and oxidative DNA damage were investigated in seven tissues (blood, bone marrow from femur, liver, spleen, kidney, duodenum, and colon) with the alkaline and the (Fpg)-modified comet assays, respectively. Concomitantly, chromosomal damage was investigated in bone marrow and in colon with the micronucleus assay. Additionally, malondialdehyde (MDA), a lipid peroxidation marker, was measured in plasma. When required, a histopathological examination was also conducted. The results showed neither obvious DNA strand breaks nor oxidative damage with the comet assay, irrespective of the dose and the organ investigated. Similarly, no increases in chromosome damage in bone marrow or lipid peroxidation in plasma were detected. However, although the response was not dose-dependent, a weak increase in the percentage of micronucleated cells was observed in the colon of rats treated with the two pyrogenic SAS at the lowest dose (5 mg/kg b.w./day). Additional data are required to confirm this result, considering in particular, the role of agglomeration/aggregation of SAS NMs in their uptake by intestinal cells.

No abstract

Titanium dioxide (TiO2 ) nanomaterials (NMs) are widely used in a diversity of products including cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, food, and inks, despite uncertainties surrounding the potential health risks that they pose to humans and the environment. Previous studies on the genotoxicity of TiO2 have reported discrepant or inconclusive findings in both in vitro and in vivo systems. This study explores the in vivo genotoxic potential of a well-characterized uncoated TiO2 NM with an average diameter of 22 nm (NM-102, from JRC repository) using several genotoxicity endpoints in the LacZ plasmid-based transgenic mouse model. Mice were exposed by intravenous injection to two daily doses of NM-102: 10 and 15 mg/kg of body weight/day. Micronuclei were analyzed in peripheral blood reticulocytes 42 hr after the last treatment. DNA strand breaks (comet assay) and gene mutations were determined in the spleens and livers of the same animals 28 days after the last treatment. Histopathological and cytological analyses were also performed in liver samples. Genotoxic effects were not detected in mice exposed to the nanosized TiO2 under the experimental conditions used, despite a moderate inflammatory response that was observed in the liver. Considering the biopersistence of TiO2 in mouse liver and the moderate inflammatory response, the possibility of a secondary genotoxic effect at higher doses and in conditions that result in a stronger inflammatory response, for example, within a longer time window, should be investigated further.

Cellulose micro/nanomaterials (CMNM), comprising cellulose microfibrils (CMF), nanofibrils (CNF), and nanocrystals (CNC), are being recognized as promising bio-nanomaterials due to their natural and renewable source, attractive properties, and potential for applications with industrial and economical value. Thus, it is crucial to investigate their potential toxicity before starting their production at a larger scale. The present study aimed at evaluating the cell internalization and in vitro cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of CMNM as compared to two multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT), NM-401 and NM-402, in A549 cells. The exposure to all studied NM, with the exception of CNC, resulted in evident cellular uptake, as analyzed by transmission electron microscopy. However, none of the CMNM induced cytotoxic effects, in contrast to the cytotoxicity observed for the MWCNT. Furthermore, no genotoxicity was observed for CNF, CNC, and NM-402 (cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay), while CMF and NM-401 were able to significantly raise micronucleus frequency. Only NM-402 was able to induce ROS formation, although it did not induce micronuclei. Thus, it is unlikely that the observed CMF and NM-401 genotoxicity is mediated by oxidative DNA damage. More studies targeting other genotoxicity endpoints and cellular and molecular events are underway to allow for a more comprehensive safety assessment of these nanocelluloses.