2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.09.028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Model-based assessment for human inhalation exposure risk to airborne nano/fine titanium dioxide particles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
34
0
2

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
34
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Especially for the lung, ''partial'' models were developed without the involvement of blood, dividing the lung into subcompartments and describing the NP transfer between them (Sturm 2007;Shelley et al 2008;Liao et al 2008).…”
Section: Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling Of Nanomaterialsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Especially for the lung, ''partial'' models were developed without the involvement of blood, dividing the lung into subcompartments and describing the NP transfer between them (Sturm 2007;Shelley et al 2008;Liao et al 2008).…”
Section: Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling Of Nanomaterialsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some pro-inflammatory effects of TiO 2 NPs were observed in vitro in pulmonary cells and in animals following lung instillation. In fact, the vast majority of studies investigating the inflammatory properties of nanomaterials target pulmonary cells, airways and lungs [5,[9][10][11]. However, NPs can also gain entry into human systems through ingestion and via dermal routes [6,12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, our findings point out that TiO 2 NP production workers have significant risk on cytotoxicity response at relatively high airborne TiO 2 anatase NP concentrations at size 10-30 nm". However, this conclusion is based on a number of errors and misunderstandings some of which were also made in a previous risk assessment [2] and described by Tomenson and Morfeld [3].…”
mentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Somewhat surprisingly, Liao et al [7] stated that it was appropriate to describe "mg m −3 yr" as yearly averaged concentration based on "insufficient information" contained in the reports by Boffetta et al [4,8], and they did not correct this obvious error in their earlier risk assessment [2]. However, Table 2.8 of Boffetta et al [8] clearly indicates that 7.75 mg m −3 year is the median "estimated cumulative exposure to respirable TiO 2 dust" of surface treatment workers, and the report contains a long and comprehensive description of how the cumulative exposures of workers were estimated.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%