Towards a nanospecific approach for risk assessment.

In the current paper, a new strategy for risk assessment of nanomaterials is described, which builds upon previous project outcomes and is developed within the FP7 NANoREG project. NANoREG has the aim to develop, for the long term, new testing strategies adapted to a high number of nanomaterials where many factors can affect their environmental and health impact. In the proposed risk assessment strategy, approaches for (Quantitative) Structure Activity Relationships ((Q)SARs), grouping and read-across are integrated and expanded to guide the user how to prioritise those nanomaterial applications that may lead to high risks for human health. Furthermore, those aspects of exposure, kinetics and hazard assessment that are most likely to be influenced by the nanospecific properties of the material under assessment are identified. These aspects are summarised in six elements, which play a key role in the strategy: exposure potential, dissolution, nanomaterial transformation, accumulation, genotoxicity and immunotoxicity. With the current approach it is possible to identify those situations where the use of nanospecific grouping, read-across and (Q)SAR tools is likely to become feasible in the future, and to point towards the generation of the type of data that is needed for scientific justification, which may lead to regulatory acceptance of nanospecific applications of these tools.The research leading to these results has been partially funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/ 2007e2013) under the project NANoREG (A common European approach to the regulatory testing of nanomaterials), grant agreement 310584.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Gerust ademhalen

Wereldwijd is er bijzonder veel aandacht voor de mogelijke gezondheidsrisico’s van producten die via nanotechnologie gemaakt worden. “De zorg richt zich bij nanodeeltjes, die bewust worden gemaakt vanwege hun bijzondere en nuttige eigenschappen, op de onzekerheid over mogelijke nadelige eigenschappen op het menselijk lichaam. Er is bijvoorbeeld grote behoefte aan kennis over wat er nu gebeurt bij realistische blootstellingsomstandigheden. Dan kunnen we vaststellen wat nu speciaal is aan die nanodeeltjes en bezien of het de asbest of DDT van de toekomst is. Bij die stoffen kon namelijk pas na jaren het risico worden vastgesteld”

Changes in the nasal epithelium of rats exposed by inhalation to mixtures of formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and acrolein

Formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and acrolein are well-known upper respiratory tract irritants and occur simultaneously as pollutants in many indoor and outdoor environments. The upper respiratory tract, and especially the nose, is the prime target for inhaled aldehydes. To study possible additive or interactive effects on the nasal epithelium we carried out 1- and 3-day inhalation studies (6 hr/day) with formaldehyde (1.0, 3.2, and 6.4 ppm), acetaldehyde (750 and 1500 ppm), acrolein (0.25, 0.67, and 1.40 ppm), or mixtures of these aldehydes, using male Wistar rats and exposure concentrations varying from clearly nontoxic to toxic. The (mixtures of) aldehydes were studied for histopathological and biochemical changes in the respiratory and olfactory epithelium of the nose. In addition, cell proliferation was determined by incorporation of bromodeoxyuridine and proliferating cell nuclear antigen expression. Effects were primarily observed after 3 days of exposure. Histopathological changes and cell proliferation of the nasal epithelium induced by mixtures of the three aldehydes appeared to be more severe and more extensive in both the respiratory and the olfactory part of the nose than those observed after exposure to the individual aldehydes at comparable exposure levels. As far as nasal histopathological changes and cell proliferation are concerned neither dose addition nor potentiating interactions occurred at no-toxic-effect levels, except for a possible potentiating effect of acetaldehyde at noneffect levels. The results did not indicate a major role for aldehyde dehydrogenases in the biotransformation of the aldehydes studied. Activities of glutathione S-transferase and glutathione reductase after 3 days of exposure to acrolein, alone or in combination with formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, were depressed whereas the glutathione peroxidase activity was elevated. No decrease of nonprotein sulphydryl levels were observed. These findings suggest that, for no-toxic-effect levels, combined exposure to these aldehydes with the same target organ (nose) and exerting the same type of adverse effect (nasal cytotoxicity), but partly with different target sites (different regions of the nasal mucosa), is not associated with a greater hazard than that associated with exposure to the individual chemicals

Sensory irritation to mixtures of formaldehyde, acrolein, and acetaldehyde in rats

Sensory irritation of formaldehyde (FRM), acrolein (ACR) and acetaldehyde (ACE) as measured by the decrease in breathing frequency (DBF) was studied in male Wistar rats using nose-only exposure. Groups of four rats were exposed to each of the single compounds separately or to mixtures of FRM, ACR and/or ACE. Exposure concentrations of the mixtures were chosen in such a way that summation of the effects of each chemical would be expected not to exceed 80% reduction of the breathing frequency. FRM, ACR and ACE appeared to act as sensory irritants as defined by Alarie (1966, 1973). With FRM and ACR desensitization occurred, whereas with ACE the breathing frequency gradually decreased with increasing exposure time (up to 30 min). For mixtures, the observed DBF was more pronounced than the DBF for each compound separately, but was less than the sum of the DBFs for the single compounds. A model for three compounds competing for the same receptor was applied to predict the DBF of mixtures of FRM, ACE and ACR. The results also showed that with mixtures no desensitization occurred; in fact, the breathing frequency further decreased in the last 15 min of exposure. These observations were similar to those found for ACE alone, and might have been caused by effects on the upper respiratory tract. The results of the present study allow the conclusion that sensory irritation in rats exposed to mixtures of irritant aldehydes is more pronounced than that caused by each of the aldehydes separately, and that the DBF as a result of exposure to a mixture could well be predicted using a model for competitive agonism, thus providing evidence that the combined effect of these aldehydes is basically a result of competition for a common receptor (trigeminal nerve)

Toxicity of formaldehyde and acrolein mixtures : in vitro studies using nasal epithelial cells

In vitro studies with human and rat nasal epithelial cells were carried out to investigate the combined toxicity of formaldehyde and acrolein and the role of aldehyde dehydrogenases in this process. These studies showed that the toxic effect of mixtures of aldehydes was additive. In addition, aldehyde dehydrogenases were inhibited by disulfiram and acrolein in S9 incubation but disulfiram did not influence the toxicity in vitro (cell culture). This study does not support the idea that aldehyde dehydrogenases play a major role in the detoxification of exogenous aldehydes. Chemicals/CAS: Acrolein, 107-02-8; Aldehyde Dehydrogenase, EC 1.2.1.3; Formaldehyde, 50-00-

Dosimetry and toxicology of nanosized particles and fibres.

Once inhaled, nanomaterials (particles and fibres) have a high probability of deposition in the lungs mainly by diffusion and to be transported throughout the body. The chemical composition and surface reactivity and dissolution rates are the driving forces for toxicity often starting with oxidative stress which can lead to inflammation, systemic effects or even lung cancer

Toxicological evaluation and risk assessment of chemical mixtures.

A major objective of combination toxicology is to establish whether a mixture of chemicals will result in an effect similar to that expected on the basis of additivity. This requires understanding of the basic concepts of the combined toxicological action of the compounds of the mixture: simple similar action (dose addition), simple dissimilar action (effect or response addition), and interaction (synergism, potentiation, antagonism). The number of possible combinations of chemicals is innumerable, and in vivo testing of these mixtures is unattainable from an ethical, economical, or pragmatic perspective. Prediction of the effect of a mixture based on the knowledge of each of the constituents requires detailed information on the composition of the mixture, exposure level, mechanism of action, and receptor of the individual compounds. Often, such information is not or is only partially available and additional studies are needed. Research strategies and methods to assess joint action or interaction of chemicals in mixtures such as whole mixture testing, physiologically based toxicokinetic modeling and isobologram and dose response surface analyses are discussed. Guidance is given for risk assessment of both simple and complex mixtures. We hypothesize that, as a rule, exposure to mixtures of chemicals at (low) non-toxic doses of the individual constituents is of no health concern. To verify the hypothesis is a challenge; to timely detect exceptions to the rule is the real challenge of major practical importance