The Overview of Methods of Nanoparticle Exposure Assessment

Zhao, Peng; Zhang, Yuanbao

doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-8916-4_22

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unlike conventional chemicals for which multiple standards have been applied to measuring and reporting the exposure, a standard method for NMs has not been established. The existing methods may or may not be suitable for NMs due to the small particle size and large surface area which results in significantly different effects than that seen with individual organic molecules (Zhao & Zhang, 2019). For engineered NMs, there is no consensus on the optimal sampling methods to assess their exposures resulting in data gained of low comparability and reproducibility.…”

Section: Risk Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toxicokinetics, dose–response, and risk assessment of nanomaterials: Methodology, challenges, and future perspectives

Chen

Riviere

Lin

2022

WIREs Nanomed Nanobiotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rapid growth of nanomaterial applications has raised safety concerns for human health. A number of studies have been conducted to assess the toxicokinetics, toxicology, dose–response, and risk assessment of different nanomaterials using in vitro and in vivo animal and human models. However, current studies cannot meet the demand for efficient assessment of toxicokinetics, dose–response relationships, or the toxicological risk arising from the rapidly increasing number of newly synthesized nanomaterials. In this article, we review the methods for conducting toxicokinetics, hazard identification, dose–response, exposure, and risk assessment studies of nanomaterials, identify the knowledge gaps, and discuss the challenges remaining. We provide the rationale behind the appropriate design of nanomaterial plasma toxicokinetic and tissue distribution studies, including caveats on the interpretation and correlation of in vitro and in vivo toxicology studies. The potential of using physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models to extrapolate toxicokinetic and toxicity findings from in vitro to in vivo and from animals to humans is discussed, and the knowledge gaps of PBPK modeling for nanomaterials are identified. While challenges still exist, there has been progress in the toxicokinetics, hazard identification, and risk assessment of nanomaterials in the past two decades. Recent advancements in the field are highlighted with relevant examples. We also share latest guidelines as well as our perspectives on future studies needed to characterize the toxicokinetics, toxicity, and dose–response relationship in support of nanomaterial risk assessment.This article is categorized under: Toxicology and Regulatory Issues in Nanomedicine > Toxicology of Nanomaterials Toxicology and Regulatory Issues in Nanomedicine > Regulatory and Policy Issues in Nanomedicine

show abstract

Section: Risk Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toxicokinetics, dose–response, and risk assessment of nanomaterials: Methodology, challenges, and future perspectives

Chen

Riviere

Lin

2022

WIREs Nanomed Nanobiotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…NMs are widely used in products, such as cosmetics, so exposure and toxicity are important parameters to consider for their risk assessment [31]. It is required by the EU chemical legislation, acknowledged as Regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), to do a consumer exposure assessment when there is a substance with a high hazard risk [32,33].…”

Section: Exposure Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety Assessment of Nanomaterials in Cosmetics: Focus on Dermal and Hair Dyes Products

Coimbra

Sousa-Oliveira²,

Ferreira-Faria³

et al. 2022

Cosmetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nanomaterials use in cosmetics is markedly enhancing, so their exposure and toxicity are important parameters to consider for their risk assessment. This review article provides an overview of the active cosmetic ingredients used for cosmetic application, including dermal cosmetics and also hair dye cosmetics, as well as their safety assessment, enriched with a compilation of the safety assessment tests available to evaluate the different types of toxicity. In fact, despite the increase in research and the number of papers published in the field of nanotechnology, the related safety assessment is still insufficient. To elucidate the possible effects that nanosized particles can have on living systems, more studies reproducing similar conditions to what happens in vivo should be conducted, particularly considering the complex interactions of the biological systems and active cosmetic ingredients to achieve newer, safer, and more efficient nanomaterials. Toward this end, ecological issues and the toxicological pattern should also be a study target.

show abstract

“…1 [15][16][17]. Researches on powder structure characterization [18][19] and nanomaterial exposure assessment [20][21][22][23][24] have validated the applicability of the MPS.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Uncertainty assessment for the airborne nanoparticle collection efficiency of a TEM grid-equipped sampling system by Monte-Carlo calculation

Xiang

Aguerre-Chariol

Morgeneyer

et al. 2021

Advanced Powder Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A mini particle sampler (MPS) equipped with a transmission electron microscopy (TEM) grid enables convenient particle sampling to subsequent analysis. However, its sampling efficiency involves uncertainties, and accurate sampling efficiency is required for particle collection applications. In this study, the sampling efficiency uncertainties from measured data and models are quantified using Monte-Carlo methods. The Sobol variance-based sensitivity analysis is used to determine the contributions of parameters to the sampling efficiency uncertainties. The results reveal that the sampling efficiency uncertainties from experimental dispersion calibration and theoretical models are generally less than 1% and 9%, respectively. Most sampling efficiencies measured data are covered by the efficiency uncertainty range simulated by theoretical models. The pore size and flowrate contribute significantly to the sampling efficiency uncertainties, and require control to improve the precision of sampling efficiency. Besides, the Cunningham correction factor is also a sensitivity parameter. The utilization of proper models is crucial to support simulations for further process optimization. This study offers a quantitative method for nanoparticle collection efficiency analysis, which will help assess nanomaterials' workplace exposure.

show abstract

The Overview of Methods of Nanoparticle Exposure Assessment

Cited by 6 publications

References 30 publications

Toxicokinetics, dose–response, and risk assessment of nanomaterials: Methodology, challenges, and future perspectives

Toxicokinetics, dose–response, and risk assessment of nanomaterials: Methodology, challenges, and future perspectives

Safety Assessment of Nanomaterials in Cosmetics: Focus on Dermal and Hair Dyes Products

Uncertainty assessment for the airborne nanoparticle collection efficiency of a TEM grid-equipped sampling system by Monte-Carlo calculation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About