Advancing Nanotoxicology: High-Throughput Screening for Assessing the Toxicity of Nanoparticle Mixtures
Le résumé fourni par la source
The widespread application of nanoparticles (NPs) in fields ranging from consumer products to industrial processes has led to increased concerns about their potential toxic effects on human health and the environment. While traditional toxicological studies often evaluate the effects of individual NPs, real-world exposure scenarios typically involve mixtures of NPs, where interactions between particles can significantly alter their toxicological profiles. This study provides an overview of overcoming this gap by possible utilization of high-throughput screening (HTS) for evaluation of the combined effects of NP mixtures under various exposure conditions. This review discusses HTS of metal oxide NPs, which have cytotoxic, genotoxic, and oxidative stress-inducing effects. Using HTS, this review describes multiple studies with multiple mixture ratios and exposure durations using human lung epithelial cells and zebrafish embryo systems. The review also describes a range of interactions, from synergistic effects, where the combined toxicity might be the sum of individual toxicities. Oxidative stress and metal ion release were key drivers of toxicity, particularly in metal oxide-dominant NP mixtures. This theoretical study highlights the importance of integrating HTS into nanotoxicology research to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the toxic behavior of NPs.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Advancing Nanotoxicology: High-Throughput Screening for Assessing the Toxicity of Nanoparticle Mixtures
- Date Crossref
- 03/12/2025
- Éditeur
- MDPI
- Type
- proceedings-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.