In-Vitro Cell Exposure Studies for the Assessment of Nanoparticle Toxicity in the Lung—A Dialog Between Aerosol Science and Biology$
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Aerosol Science 42 (2011) 668–692 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Aerosol Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jaerosci In-vitro cell exposure studies for the assessment of nanoparticle toxicity in the lung—A dialog between aerosol science and biology$ Hanns-Rudolf Paur a, Flemming R. Cassee b, Justin Teeguarden c, Heinz Fissan d, Silvia Diabate e, Michaela Aufderheide f, Wolfgang G. Kreyling g, Otto Hanninen¨ h, Gerhard Kasper i, Michael Riediker j, Barbara Rothen-Rutishauser k, Otmar Schmid g,n a Institut fur¨ Technische Chemie (ITC-TAB), Karlsruher Institut fur¨ Technologie, Campus Nord, Hermann-von-Helmholtz-Platz 1, 76344 Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen, Germany b Center for Environmental Health, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, P.O. Box 1, 3720 MA Bilthoven, The Netherlands c Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Fundamental and Computational Science Directorate, 902 Battelle Boulevard, Richland, WA 99352, USA d Institute of Energy and Environmental Technologies (IUTA), Duisburg, Germany e Institut fur¨ Toxikologie und Genetik, Karlsruher Institut fur¨ Technologie, Campus Nord, Hermann-von-Helmholtz-Platz 1, 76344 Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen, Germany f Cultex Laboratories, Feodor-Lynen-Straße 21, 30625 Hannover, Germany g Comprehensive Pneumology Center, Institute of Lung Biology and Disease, Helmholtz Zentrum Munchen,¨ Ingolstadter¨ Landstrasse 1, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany h THL National Institute for Health and Welfare, PO Box 95, 70701 Kuopio, Finland i Institut fur¨ Mechanische Verfahrenstechnik und Mechanik—Bereich Gas-Partikel-Systeme, Karlsruher Institut fur¨ Technologie, Campus Sud,¨ Geb. 30.70 Straße am Forum 8, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany j Universite´ de Lausanne et Geneve, Institute for Work and Health, Rue du Bugnon, 21 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland k Universitat¨ Bern, Pneumologie, Departement klinische Forschung und Inselspital, Murtenstrasse 50, 3010 Bern, Switzerland article info abstract Article history: The introduction of engineered nanostructured materials into a rapidly increasing Received 12 December 2010 number of industrial and consumer products will result in enhanced exposure to Received in revised form engineered nanoparticles. Workplace exposure has been identified as the most likely 11 June 2011 source of uncontrolled inhalation of engineered aerosolized nanoparticles, but release Accepted 11 June 2011 of engineered nanoparticles may occur at any stage of the lifecycle of (consumer) Available online 22 June 2011 products. The dynamic development of nanomaterials with possibly unknown toxico- Keywords: logical effects poses a challenge for the assessment of nanoparticle induced toxicity and Nanoparticle safety. Nanotoxicity In this consensus document from a workshop on in-vitro cell systems for nano- Particle toxicity particle toxicity testing1 an overview is given of the main issues concerning exposure to Cell exposure system Air–liquid interface airborne nanoparticles, lung physiology, biological mechanisms of (adverse) action, in- Dose metric vitro cell exposure systems, realistic tissue doses, risk assessment and social aspects of nanotechnology. The workshop participants recognized the large potential of in-vitro cell exposure systems for reliable, high-throughput screening of nanoparticle toxicity. For the investigation of lung toxicity, a strong preference was expressed for air–liquid interface (ALI) cell exposure systems (rather than submerged cell exposure systems) as $ Based on a workshop sponsored by Gesellschaft fur¨ Aerosolforschung, Karlsruhe, Germany, 5–6 September 2009. n Corresponding author. Tel.: þ49 8931872557; fax: þ49 8931872400. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (H.-R. Paur), fl[email protected] (F.R. Cassee), [email protected] (J. Teeguarden), heinz.fi[email protected] (H. Fissan), [email protected] (S. Diabate), [email protected] (M. Aufderheide), [email protected] (W.G. Kreyling), otto.hanninen@thl.fi (O. Hanninen),¨ [email protected] (G. Kasper), [email protected] (M. Riediker), [email protected] (B. Rothen-Rutishauser), [email protected] (O. Schmid). 1 Workshop on ‘In-Vitro Exposure Studies for Toxicity Testing of Engineered Nanoparticles’ sponsored by the Association for Aerosol Research (GAeF), 5–6 September 2009, Karlsruhe, Germany. 0021-8502/$ - see front matter & 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jaerosci.2011.06.005 H.-R. Paur et al. / Journal of Aerosol Science 42 (2011) 668–692 669 they more closely resemble in-vivo conditions in the lungs and they allow for unaltered and dosimetrically accurate delivery of aerosolized nanoparticles to the cells. An important aspect, which is frequently overlooked, is the comparison of typically used in-vitro dose levels with realistic in-vivo nanoparticle doses in the lung. If we consider average ambient urban exposure and occupational exposure at 5 mg/m3 (maximum level allowed by Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)) as the boundaries of human exposure, the corresponding upper-limit range of nanoparticle flux delivered to the lung tissue is 3 Â 10À5–5 Â 10-3 mg/h/cm2 of lung tissue and 2– 300 particles/h/(epithelial) cell. This range can be easily matched and even exceeded by almost all currently available cell exposure systems. The consensus statement includes a set of recommendations for conducting in-vitro cell exposure studies with pulmonary cell systems and identifies urgent needs for future development. As these issues are crucial for the introduction of safe nanomater- ials into the marketplace and the living environment, they deserve more attention and more interaction between biologists and aerosol scientists. The members of the workshop believe that further advances in in-vitro cell exposure studies would be greatly facilitated by a more active role of the aerosol scientists. The technical know- how for developing and running ALI in-vitro exposure systems is available in the aerosol community and at the same time biologists/toxicologists are required for proper assessment of the biological impact of nanoparticles. & 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction With the advent of nanotechnology, the prospects of manufactured nanomaterials in many applications have progressed rapidly (Gwinn & Vallyathan, 2006). The potential benefits of nanotechnology are undoubted. Currently, numerous types of novel nanoparticles are being produced for widespread application in consumer productions as well as for therapeutic, diagnostic and other novel technological applications. In the wake of this development literally hundreds of thousands ‘new’ types of nanoparticles are already or will be manufactured differing in size, agglomeration stage, shape, surface charge as well as material, surface functionalisation, layered structure and many more properties. Typically, engineered nanoparticles refers to particles which are manufactured (not inadvertently generated) and shorter than 100 nm in at least one dimension. There are currently standardization efforts under way (e.g. ONR CEN ISO/TS 27687:2009-06-01) applying this definition to ‘nanoobjects’, but no generally accepted nomenclature has been established, yet. Material safety regulations traditionally relied on animal testing. For both ethical and financial reasons, animal experiments cannot be performed for each single type of new nanoparticle. Hence, workers’ safety, consumer health and environmental protection concerns require new approaches to toxicity testing of these nanoparticles, which may be exposed to during production, handling, use and recycling of nanoparticles or of materials containing nanoparticles. Toxicology is defined as the study of the adverse effects of substances on living organisms (Timbrell, 1998). One of the fundamental principles of toxicology is that the health ‘risk’ posed by a substance is a function of its potential to cause harm, or ‘hazard’, and the amount of substance a biological system is ‘exposed’ to. This is expressed by the following relation: Risk ¼ f ðexposure, hazardÞ Another important principle of toxicology is that all materials are toxic, if exposure occurs in sufficient quantities (Timbrell, 1998). Most commonly this principle is quoted as phrased by Paracelsus (CH, 1493–1541): ‘All things are poison and nothing is without poison, only the dose permits something not to be poisonous’. These fundamental toxicology principles imply that substances with a low hazard generally pose a low risk. If however, there is a high enough exposure of these low hazard substances, then even these substances can be harmful, or even fatal. And of course, the opposite can also occur: high hazard but relative low exposure also results in a low risk. In this paper we focus on hazard identification but we would also like to stress the importance of accurate exposure data. A very important aspect is the identification of the most relevant dose metric for particle toxicity (Schmid et al., 2009; Grass et al., 2010). It is acknowledged that numerous pathways of nanoparticle toxicity (henceforth nanotoxicity) exist including but not limited to oxidative potency, bioactivation of toxic organic compounds (e.g. polyaromatic hydrocarbons), inflammation, binding to biomolecules leading to inactivation or mutations, adjuvant action, and (frustrated) phagocytosis (Donaldson et al., 2005, 2006). Depending on the physicochemical properties of the nanoparticles, one or more