Potential toxicity of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPION)

The development of novel nanomaterials with unique physico-chemical properties is increasing at a rapid rate, with potential applications across a broad range of manufacturing industries and consumer products. Nanomaterial safety is therefore becoming an increasingly contentious issue that has intensified over the past 4 years, and in response, a steady stream of studies focusing on nanotoxicology are emerging. However, it is becoming increasingly evident that nanomaterials cannot be treated in the same manner as chemical compounds with regards to their safety assessment, as their unique physico-chemical properties are also responsible for unexpected interactions with experimental components that generate misleading data-sets. In this report, we focus on nanomaterial interactions with colorimetric and fluorometric dyes, components of cell culture growth medium and genotoxicity assay components, and the resultant consequences on test systems are demonstrated. Thus, highlighting some of the potential confounding factors that need to be considered in order to ensure that in vitro genotoxicity assays report true biological impacts in response to nanomaterial exposure.

There is a pressing requirement to define a hazard identification and risk management strategy for nanomaterials due to the rapid growth in the nanotechnology industry and their promise of life-style revolutions through the development of wide-ranging nano-containing consumer products. Consequently, a battery of well defined and appropriate in vitro assays to assess a number of genotoxicity endpoints is required to minimise extensive and costly in vivo testing. However, the validity of the established protocols in current OECD recognised genotoxicity assays for nanomaterials is currently being questioned. In this report, we therefore consider the in vitro OECD genotoxicity test battery including the Ames, micronucleus and HPRT forward mutation assays, and their potential role in the safety assessment of nanomaterial induced DNA damage in vitro.

A mechanistic understanding of carcinogenic genotoxicity is necessary to determine consequences of chemical exposure on human populations and improve health risk assessments. Currently, linear dose-responses are assumed for DNA reactive compounds, ignoring cytoprotective processes that may limit permanent damage. To investigate the biological significance of low-dose exposures, human lymphoblastoid cells were treated with alkylating agents that have different mechanisms of action and DNA targets: methylmethane sulfonate (MMS), methylnitrosourea (MNU), ethylmethane sulfonate (EMS), and ethylnitrosourea (ENU). Chromosomal damage and point mutations were quantified with the micronucleus and hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase forward mutation assays. MNU and ENU showed linear dose-responses, whereas MMS and EMS had nonlinear curves containing a range of nonmutagenic low doses. The lowest observed effect level for induction of chromosomal aberrations was 0.85 μg/mL MMS and 1.40 μg/mL EMS; point mutations required 1.25 μg/mL MMS and 1.40 μg/mL EMS before a mutagenic effect was detected. This nonlinearity could be due to homeostatic maintenance by DNA repair, which is efficient at low doses of compounds that primarily alkylate N⁷-G and rarely attack O atoms. A pragmatic threshold for carcinogenicity may therefore exist for such genotoxins. [Cancer Res 2007;67(8):3904–11]