IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v36y2016i8p1538-1550.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Approaches to Develop Alternative Testing Strategies to Inform Human Health Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials

Author

Listed:
  • Vicki Stone
  • Helinor J. Johnston
  • Dominique Balharry
  • Jeremy M. Gernand
  • Mary Gulumian

Abstract

The development of alternative testing strategies (ATS) for hazard assessment of new and emerging materials is high on the agenda of scientists, funders, and regulators. The relatively large number of nanomaterials on the market and under development means that an increasing emphasis will be placed on the use of reliable, predictive ATS when assessing their safety. We have provided recommendations as to how ATS development for assessment of nanomaterial hazard may be accelerated. Predefined search terms were used to identify the quantity and distribution of peer‐reviewed publications for nanomaterial hazard assessment following inhalation, ingestion, or dermal absorption. A summary of knowledge gaps relating to nanomaterial hazard is provided to identify future research priorities and areas in which a rich data set might exist to allow ATS identification. Consultation with stakeholders (e.g., academia, industry, regulators) was critical to ensure that current expert opinion was reflected. The gap analysis revealed an abundance of studies that assessed the local and systemic impacts of inhaled particles, and so ATS are available for immediate use. Development of ATS for assessment of the dermal toxicity of chemicals is already relatively advanced, and these models should be applied to nanomaterials as relatively few studies have assessed the dermal toxicity of nanomaterials to date. Limited studies have investigated the local and systemic impacts of ingested nanomaterials. If the recommendations for research prioritization proposed are adopted, it is envisioned that a comprehensive battery of ATS can be developed to support the risk assessment process for nanomaterials. Some alternative models are available for immediate implementation, while others require more developmental work to become widely adopted. Case studies are included that can be used to inform the selection of alternative models and end points when assessing the pathogenicity of fibers and mode of action of nanomaterial toxicity.

Suggested Citation

  • Vicki Stone & Helinor J. Johnston & Dominique Balharry & Jeremy M. Gernand & Mary Gulumian, 2016. "Approaches to Develop Alternative Testing Strategies to Inform Human Health Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1538-1550, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:36:y:2016:i:8:p:1538-1550
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12645
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12645
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12645?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. A. Shatkin & Kimberly J. Ong & Christian Beaudrie & Amy J. Clippinger & Christine Ogilvie Hendren & Lynne T. Haber & Myriam Hill & Patricia Holden & Alan J. Kennedy & Baram Kim & Margaret MacDonell, 2016. "Advancing Risk Analysis for Nanoscale Materials: Report from an International Workshop on the Role of Alternative Testing Strategies for Advancement," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1520-1537, August.
    2. Christie Sayes & Ivan Ivanov, 2010. "Comparative Study of Predictive Computational Models for Nanoparticle‐Induced Cytotoxicity," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(11), pages 1723-1734, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. J. A. Shatkin & Kimberly J. Ong & Christian Beaudrie & Amy J. Clippinger & Christine Ogilvie Hendren & Lynne T. Haber & Myriam Hill & Patricia Holden & Alan J. Kennedy & Baram Kim & Margaret MacDonell, 2016. "Advancing Risk Analysis for Nanoscale Materials: Report from an International Workshop on the Role of Alternative Testing Strategies for Advancement," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1520-1537, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jeremy M. Gernand & Elizabeth A. Casman, 2014. "A Meta‐Analysis of Carbon Nanotube Pulmonary Toxicity Studies—How Physical Dimensions and Impurities Affect the Toxicity of Carbon Nanotubes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(3), pages 583-597, March.
    2. Vicki Stone & Martin Führ & Peter H. Feindt & Hans Bouwmeester & Igor Linkov & Stefania Sabella & Finbarr Murphy & Kilian Bizer & Lang Tran & Marlene Ågerstrand & Carlos Fito & Torben Andersen & Diana, 2018. "The Essential Elements of a Risk Governance Framework for Current and Future Nanotechnologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(7), pages 1321-1331, July.
    3. Igor Linkov & Benjamin D. Trump & Elke Anklam & David Berube & Patrick Boisseasu & Christopher Cummings & Scott Ferson & Marie-Valentine Florin & Bernard Goldstein & Danail Hristozov & Keld Alstrup Je, 2018. "Comparative, collaborative, and integrative risk governance for emerging technologies," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 170-176, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:36:y:2016:i:8:p:1538-1550. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.