Nanotoxicity: a challenge for future medicine

Akçan, Ramazan; Aydoğan, Halit Canberk; Yıldırım, Mahmut Şerif; Taştekin, Burak; Sağlam, Necdet

doi:10.3906/sag-1912-209

Cited by 74 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 150 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Greater penetration into tissues at molecular level, improved drug localization and cellular uptake, higher feasibility to program NPs to identify cancer cells, healthy cells interaction avoidance and larger surface area are some of the properties of nanomedicines that are helpful in controlling and treating cancers [27]. Resolving the challenges of synthesizing controllable, reproducible and scalable NPs as well as improving NPs screening and evaluation will facilitate clinical development [28][29][30].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A 40 Month Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial on the Effect of BCc1 Nanomedicine on Survival of Metastatic and Non-Metastatic Gastric Cancer Patients

Hafizi¹,

Kalanaky²,

Moaiery

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Complementary experiments on nanomedicines as proper candidates for the control and treatment of cancer are widely being conducted nowadays. In the previous study, the effect of BCc1 nanomedicine, which is synthetized based on nanochelating technology, on overall survival (OS) and quality of life of gastric cancer patients was evaluated after 18 months of consumption. The OS of the same patients is reported in this study after 40 months. Methods: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel, multicenter design was used in this study. 123 metastatic and non-metastatic gastric cancer patients of both genders (between 25 and 85 years old) participated in this experiment to evaluate their OS after consuming BCc1 for 40 months and to identify the adverse events of this nanomedicine. Results: The median OS of metastatic patients was 257 days in the BCc1 group [95% confidence interval (CI): 144. 142-369.858], while it was 161 days in the placebo [95% CI: 118.462-203.538]; hazard ratio (HR): 0.802 [95% CI: 0.483-1.333] (P-Value = 0.395). Similarly, the median OS of non-metastatic patients was 718 days in the BCc1 group [95% CI; 577.706-860.213], while it was 520 days in the placebo [95% CI: 460.280- 580.690]; HR: 0.807 [95% CI: 0.343,1.902] (P-Value = 0.624). There was no evidence of adverse events after 40 months.Conclusion: The OS improvement of metastatic and non-metastatic gastric cancer patients in the previous (18 months of follow-up) and current (40 months of follow-up) studies showed that BCc1 can be used along with base treatments to improve cancer patients’ OS. Trial registration: IRCTID, IRCT2017101935423N1.Registered on 19 October 2017, http://www.irct.ir/ IRCT2017101935423N1.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A 40 Month Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial on the Effect of BCc1 Nanomedicine on Survival of Metastatic and Non-Metastatic Gastric Cancer Patients

Hafizi¹,

Kalanaky²,

Moaiery

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nanotoxicology is focused on the study of the adverse effects of nanomaterials on human health and the environment [ 141 ]. The entry routes of natural and anthropogenic nanoparticles in the body are human skin, lungs, the gastrointestinal tract, implants, and injections.…”

Section: Nanotoxicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Benefits of Smart Nanoparticles in Dental Applications

Vasiliu¹,

Racoviţă²,

Gugoasa

et al. 2021

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dentistry, as a branch of medicine, has undergone continuous evolution over time. The scientific world has focused its attention on the development of new methods and materials with improved properties that meet the needs of patients. For this purpose, the replacement of so-called “passive” dental materials that do not interact with the oral environment with “smart/intelligent” materials that have the capability to change their shape, color, or size in response to an externally stimulus, such as the temperature, pH, light, moisture, stress, electric or magnetic fields, and chemical compounds, has received much attention in recent years. A strong trend in dental applications is to apply nanotechnology and smart nanomaterials such as nanoclays, nanofibers, nanocomposites, nanobubbles, nanocapsules, solid-lipid nanoparticles, nanospheres, metallic nanoparticles, nanotubes, and nanocrystals. Among the nanomaterials, the smart nanoparticles present several advantages compared to other materials, creating the possibility to use them in various dental applications, including preventive dentistry, endodontics, restoration, and periodontal diseases. This review is focused on the recent developments and dental applications (drug delivery systems and restoration materials) of smart nanoparticles.

show abstract

“…Conversely, especially in medicine, nanomaterials raise some concerns regarding their cytotoxicity or biocompatibility. Thus, a number of scientific projects have been assessing the toxicity of the selected nanomaterials and creating the risk management framework for the use of nanomaterials in medical applications [ 184 ].…”

Section: Current Trends In the Evaluation Of Nanotoxicity In Vitromentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of Oxidative Stress Induced by Nanomaterials in Cells—The Roles of Reactive Oxygen Species and Glutathione

Čapek

Roušar

2021

Molecules

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The potential of nanomaterials use is huge, especially in fields such as medicine or industry. Due to widespread use of nanomaterials, their cytotoxicity and involvement in cellular pathways ought to be evaluated in detail. Nanomaterials can induce the production of a number of substances in cells, including reactive oxygen species (ROS), participating in physiological and pathological cellular processes. These highly reactive substances include: superoxide, singlet oxygen, hydroxyl radical, and hydrogen peroxide. For overall assessment, there are a number of fluorescent probes in particular that are very specific and selective for given ROS. In addition, due to the involvement of ROS in a number of cellular signaling pathways, understanding the principle of ROS production induced by nanomaterials is very important. For defense, the cells have a number of reparative and especially antioxidant mechanisms. One of the most potent antioxidants is a tripeptide glutathione. Thus, the glutathione depletion can be a characteristic manifestation of harmful effects caused by the prooxidative-acting of nanomaterials in cells. For these reasons, here we would like to provide a review on the current knowledge of ROS-mediated cellular nanotoxicity manifesting as glutathione depletion, including an overview of approaches for the detection of ROS levels in cells.

show abstract

Nanotoxicity: a challenge for future medicine

Cited by 74 publications

References 150 publications

A 40 Month Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial on the Effect of BCc1 Nanomedicine on Survival of Metastatic and Non-Metastatic Gastric Cancer Patients

A 40 Month Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial on the Effect of BCc1 Nanomedicine on Survival of Metastatic and Non-Metastatic Gastric Cancer Patients

The Benefits of Smart Nanoparticles in Dental Applications

Detection of Oxidative Stress Induced by Nanomaterials in Cells—The Roles of Reactive Oxygen Species and Glutathione

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About