2006
DOI: 10.1021/nl060162e
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cellular Toxicity of Carbon-Based Nanomaterials

Abstract: The cellular toxicity of carbon-based nanomaterials was studied as a function of their aspect ratio and surface chemistry. These structures were multiwalled carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofibers, and carbon nanoparticles. Their toxicity was tested in vitro on lung tumor cells. Our work clearly indicated that these materials are toxic while the hazardous effect is size-dependent. Moreover, cytotoxicity is enhanced when the surface of the particles is functionalized after an acid treatment.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

20
643
3
12

Year Published

2008
2008
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1,031 publications
(678 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
20
643
3
12
Order By: Relevance
“…Although nano-silver was known to be harmless, recent studies (Asare, et al, 2012;Foldbjerg, Dang, & Autrup, 2011;Hussain, et al, 2006;Kim, et al, 2009) have provided convincing evidence of toxicity associated with the exposure to nano-silver. More detailed information about the potential adverse effects of various NMs has been provided by several researchers (Arora, et al, 2012;Holgate, 2010;Horie & Fujita, 2011;Jeng & Swanson, 2006;Magrez, et al, 2006;Saquib, et al, 2012;Sharifi, et al, 2012;Wani, Hashim, Nabi, & Malik, 2011).…”
Section: Nanomaterials Toxicitymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although nano-silver was known to be harmless, recent studies (Asare, et al, 2012;Foldbjerg, Dang, & Autrup, 2011;Hussain, et al, 2006;Kim, et al, 2009) have provided convincing evidence of toxicity associated with the exposure to nano-silver. More detailed information about the potential adverse effects of various NMs has been provided by several researchers (Arora, et al, 2012;Holgate, 2010;Horie & Fujita, 2011;Jeng & Swanson, 2006;Magrez, et al, 2006;Saquib, et al, 2012;Sharifi, et al, 2012;Wani, Hashim, Nabi, & Malik, 2011).…”
Section: Nanomaterials Toxicitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is now a growing body of literature on the potential undesirable effects caused by the exposure to different types of ENMs (Horie & Fujita, 2011;Jeng & Swanson, 2006;Karlsson, Gustafsson, Cronholm, & Möller, 2009;Magrez, et al, 2006). Although the awareness of the potential adverse effects of ENMs is increasing, there are still numerous unanswered questions which complicate the appropriate evaluation of toxicity at the nano-scale dimension.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The relevance of these systems is related to the main difficulty in the use of CNT in nanomedicine associated with their hydrophobicity and tendency to aggregate into bundles. In fact, for practical applications, such aggregates have cytotoxic effect and even cause cell death in dose dependent manner [29]. Systems size and simulations timescales suitable to treat and to observe the spontaneous insertion process of CNTs bundles can be still feasible for coarse-grained models still close to atomistic (typically one bead corresponds to four non hydrogen atoms, 4:1 mapping), as the ones reported in this paper, if non-bonded interactions are treated using a Self Consistent Field (SCF) theory approach having models based on a hybrid particle-field (PF) representation [30].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In spite of the large number of studies aimed at establishing the biological activity of nanoparticles and the influence of important physico-chemical parameters such as size, surface properties, crystal phase and others (Hoshino et al 2004;Magrez et al 2006;Oberdorster et al 2005b); the use of appropriate dose metrics needs to be carefully considered. For example, to determine the effect of size of the nanoparticle on biological activity, should comparisons of activity or biological response be based on the mass of the sample, as is done in conventional toxicological studies, or should the metric be total surface area when comparing effects of different sized particles?…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%