FreeTextSearch
 
search View English language version of this page
 
 
 

Weight of evidence analysis for assessing the genotoxic potential of carbon nanotubes

Reference Møller P, Jacobsen NR. Weight of evidence analysis for assessing the genotoxic potential of carbon nanotubes. Critical Reviews in Toxicology 2017;47(10):871-88.
Udgivet: 2017
[Type] Videnskabelig artikel
[Resumé] Carbon nanotube (CNT) is a nanomaterial that has received interest because of its high-tensile strength and low weight. Although CNTs differ substantially in physico-chemical properties, they share high aspect ratio which resembles that of asbestos and other fibers causing lung cancer and mesothelioma. One type of multi-walled CNTs (i.e. MWCNT-7) has been classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans by IARC (Group 2B) based on experimental animal data, whereas other types of MWCNTs and single-walled CNTs (SWCNT) could not be classified due to lack of data from epidemiologic studies and insufficient mechanistic evidence. Damage to DNA is considered to be a key mechanistic step in the development of fiber-induced cancer. Thus, the genotoxic potential can be a cornerstone in the evaluation of hazards of CNTs. The present study used a weight of evidence (WoE) analysis to evaluate the genotoxicity of different types of CNTs. Genotoxicity endpoints close to cancer (mutations and chromosome aberrations) and animal models had highest weight in the WoE analysis. Eight CNT materials out of 130, which had been assessed in several studies, were evaluated in the WoE analysis. The results demonstrated that MWCNT-7 has strongest WoE for a genotoxic hazard among the MWCNTs. Two types of SWCNTs have a similar WoE for genotoxicity as MWCNT-7. Several reference materials from the Joint Research Centre have less WoE for genotoxicity. The WoE analysis demonstrates a difference in genotoxicity for CNTs, but further research is required to unravel the physico-chemical characteristics that govern the differences in genotoxic hazard.
Link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408444.2017.1367755
Bestilling: Denne udgivelse kan ikke bestilles fra NFA's Forlag
[Oprettet] 25.09.2017
 
Opdateret  25.09.2017
Kontakt: NFA's webredaktion
 
Sociale medieomtaler af denne artikel

Klik på cirklen for mere information om omtaler og deling af denne artikel.

Altmetric er en tjeneste, der registrerer sociale medieomtaler og delinger af referencer forskningsartikler, hvis læsere har linket unikt til artiklen (tidskriftets abstractside, DOI-link etc.). Tjenesten overvåger p.t. omtaler på udvalgte sociale medieplatforme.

Hvis cirklen viser "?", er der endnu ikke registreret omtaler på de overvågede medier.

Om betalingstidsskrifter
Mange videnskabelige tidsskrifter tager betaling for adgang til hele artiklen. Hvis du ikke har adgang til et bestemt tidsskrift, kan du benytte Bibliotek.dk. Her kan du søge efter artikler, bogtitler og tidsskrifter på tværs af de danske bibliotekssystemer.

Det letteste er at gå ind under "Flere søgemuligheder" på siden og så indtaste tidsskriftets navn i Feltet "Titel". Derved får du en oversigt over folke- eller forskningsbiblioteker, som abonnerer på det pågældende tidsskrift.

 
 
 

Det Nationale Forskningscenter for Arbejdsmiljø | Lersø Parkallé 105 | DK-2100 København Ø |

Tlf 39 16 52 00 | fax 39 16 52 01 | e-mail: nfa@arbejdsmiljoforskning.dk | CVR: 15413700 | EAN: 5798000399518

Vis desktop version
|WEBSITET ANVENDER COOKIES TIL AT HUSKE DIG OG DINE INDSTILLINGER.| Læs mere her