In vitro-ex vivo model systems for nanosafety assessment

Engineered nanomaterials have unique and novel properties enabling wide-ranging new applications in nearly all fields of research. As these new properties have raised concerns about potential adverse effects for the environment and human health, extensive efforts are underway to define reliable, cost- and time-effective, as well as mechanistic-based testing strategies to replace the current method of animal testing, which is still the most prevalent model used for the risk assessment of chemicals. Current approaches for nanomaterials follow this line. The aim of this review is to explore and qualify the relevance of new in vitro and ex vivo models in (nano)material safety assessment, a crucial prerequisite for translation into applications

Anticipation of regulatory needs for nanotechnology-enabled health products

Development of nanotechnology-based applications in health sector offer innovative therapeutic and diagnostic opportunities to address medical needs. At the moment, no specific regulatory framework exists for nano-enabled health products and the current regulatory practise might require additional guidance in order to fully cover the particularities of such products. This white paper summarizes the major challenges associated with the regulation of the nano-enabled health products. Depending on their mode of action nano-enabled health products are regulated either as medicinal products or medical devices. However, due to the increased complexity of such products and their size-related properties the selection of the regulatory path can become challenging since the primary mode of action might be difficult to determine. Due to the fast progress in the field and the lack of robust datasets, only initial guidance on regulatory information needs is currently available and the question remains whether these identified requirements are sufficient for a reliable characterisation of nano-enabled products. In relation to the need for additional information on the quality, safety and efficacy standardised methods have to be available. However, many conventional methods might not be suitable or reliable for nanomaterial testing due to the interference of nanomaterial with assays components. New state-of-art methods, instruments, approaches or tools have not yet sufficiently proven their reliability and relevance for the given purpose. As patents are expiring generic versions of the innovator products will require access to the market. Since the physicochemical characteristics can be very complex and depend on the manufacturing process, pharmacokinetic assessment might not be sufficient and more guidance is needed on how the bioequivalence can be demonstrated. For the nano-enabled health products classified as medical devices, the European Definition on nanomaterials will apply, determining its further classification and regulatory requirements. Yet, the implementation of the definition and the necessity to determine the exposure to nanomaterials may pose additional challenges. The regulatory challenges highlighted in this white paper should guide the research projects and the involved communities willing to advance the regulatory science in the area of nanomedicine.JRC.F.2-Consumer Products Safet

Versailles project on advanced materials and standards (VAMAS) interlaboratory study on measuring the number concentration of colloidal gold nanoparticles

We describe the outcome of a large international interlaboratory study of the measurement of particle number concentration of colloidal nanoparticles, project 10 of the technical working area 34, "Nanoparticle Populations" of the Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards (VAMAS). A total of 50 laboratories delivered results for the number concentration of 30 nm gold colloidal nanoparticles measured using particle tracking analysis (PTA), single particle inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (spICP-MS), ultraviolet-visible (UV-Vis) light spectroscopy, centrifugal liquid sedimentation (CLS) and small angle X-ray scattering (SAXS). The study provides quantitative data to evaluate the repeatability of these methods and their reproducibility in the measurement of number concentration of model nanoparticle systems following a common measurement protocol. We find that the population-averaging methods of SAXS, CLS and UV-Vis have high measurement repeatability and reproducibility, with between-labs variability of 2.6%, 11% and 1.4% respectively. However, results may be significantly biased for reasons including inaccurate material properties whose values are used to compute the number concentration. Particle-counting method results are less reproducibile than population-averaging methods, with measured between-labs variability of 68% and 46% for PTA and spICP-MS respectively. This study provides the stakeholder community with important comparative data to underpin measurement reproducibility and method validation for number concentration of nanoparticles

Versailles project on advanced materials and standards (VAMAS) interlaboratory study on measuring the number concentration of colloidal gold nanoparticles

We describe the outcome of a large international interlaboratory study of the measurement of particle number concentration of colloidal nanoparticles, project 10 of the technical working area 34, "Nanoparticle Populations" of the Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards (VAMAS). A total of 50 laboratories delivered results for the number concentration of 30 nm gold colloidal nanoparticles measured using particle tracking analysis (PTA), single particle inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (spICP-MS), ultraviolet-visible (UV-Vis) light spectroscopy, centrifugal liquid sedimentation (CLS) and small angle X-ray scattering (SAXS). The study provides quantitative data to evaluate the repeatability of these methods and their reproducibility in the measurement of number concentration of model nanoparticle systems following a common measurement protocol. We find that the population-averaging methods of SAXS, CLS and UV-Vis have high measurement repeatability and reproducibility, with between-labs variability of 2.6%, 11% and 1.4% respectively. However, results may be significantly biased for reasons including inaccurate material properties whose values are used to compute the number concentration. Particle-counting method results are less reproducibile than population-averaging methods, with measured between-labs variability of 68% and 46% for PTA and spICP-MS respectively. This study provides the stakeholder community with important comparative data to underpin measurement reproducibility and method validation for number concentration of nanoparticles

Versailles project on advanced materials and standards (VAMAS) interlaboratory study on measuring the number concentration of colloidal gold nanoparticles

We describe the outcome of a large international interlaboratory study of the measurement of particle number concentration of colloidal nanoparticles, project 10 of the technical working area 34, "Nanoparticle Populations" of the Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards (VAMAS). A total of 50 laboratories delivered results for the number concentration of 30 nm gold colloidal nanoparticles measured using particle tracking analysis (PTA), single particle inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (spICP-MS), ultraviolet-visible (UV-Vis) light spectroscopy, centrifugal liquid sedimentation (CLS) and small angle X-ray scattering (SAXS). The study provides quantitative data to evaluate the repeatability of these methods and their reproducibility in the measurement of number concentration of model nanoparticle systems following a common measurement protocol. We find that the population-averaging methods of SAXS, CLS and UV-Vis have high measurement repeatability and reproducibility, with between-labs variability of 2.6%, 11% and 1.4% respectively. However, results may be significantly biased for reasons including inaccurate material properties whose values are used to compute the number concentration. Particle-counting method results are less reproducibile than population-averaging methods, with measured between-labs variability of 68% and 46% for PTA and spICP-MS respectively. This study provides the stakeholder community with important comparative data to underpin measurement reproducibility and method validation for number concentration of nanoparticles

Repeatability: some aspects concerning the evaluation of the measurement uncertainty

ISSN:0949-1775ISSN:1432-051

A forgotten fact about the standard deviation

ISSN:0949-1775ISSN:1432-051

Comparability of in Vitro Tests for Bioactive Nanoparticles: A Common Assay to Detect Reactive Oxygen Species as an Example

The release of reactive oxygen species (ROS) during the electron transport of mitochondrial aerobic respiration is the major source of ROS. However, contact between cells and nanoparticles (NPs) can also induce release of ROS, leading to an imbalance towards the pro-oxidative state. At low levels of ROS production, cells initiate a protective response to guarantee their survival, but an excess of ROS can damage cellular compounds such as membranes and various organelles, or directly cause genotoxicity. Thus an elevated level of ROS is an important indicator of cellular stress and an accurate recording of this parameter would be very informative. ROS can be measured by various assays, but all known assays measuring and quantifying ROS possess certain weaknesses. The problems and challenges of quantitatively detecting ROS in vitro using the 2',7'-dichlorodihydrofluorescein (DCF) assay is discussed as an example. In addition, we debate the difficulties in finding a suitable and stable chemical reaction control for the DCF assay (or other ROS-detecting assays). As a conclusion, we believe that using 3-morpholinosydnonimine hydrochloride (Sin-1) as a ROS inducer in the DCF assay is feasible only qualitatively. However, a quantitative measurement of the absolute amount of ROS produced and a quantitative comparison between experiments is (at the moment) impossible.ISSN:1422-006