Moving toward exposure and risk evaluation of nanomaterials: Challenges and future directions

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Nanomedicine and Nanobiotechnology

Volumn 1, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 426-433

  Thomas, Treye ^a   Bahadori, Tina ^b   Savage, Nora ^c   Thomas, Karluss ^d  

^a US Consumer Product Safety Commission   (United States)

^b AMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL   (United States)

^c U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^d Silicones Environmental Health Safety Council of North America   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BREAKTHROUGH INNOVATIONS; COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT; COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS; ENGINEERED NANOMATERIALS; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS; EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT; INTEGRATED APPROACH;

CHARACTERIZATION; CONSUMER PRODUCTS; HEALTH RISKS; NANOSTRUCTURED MATERIALS;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

NANOMATERIAL;

ANIMAL; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; FORECASTING; HUMAN; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ANIMALS; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; FORECASTING; HUMANS; NANOSTRUCTURES; OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 77949335860     PISSN: 19395116     EISSN: 19390041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/wnan.34     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) Environ-mental, health, and safety research needs for engineered nanoscale materials. http://www.nano.gov/html/res/pubs.html. 2006.
2. Morgan K. Development of a preliminary framework for informing the risk analysis and risk management of nanoparticles.Risk Anal2006, 25:1621-1635.
3. Tsuji JS, Maynard AD, Howard PC, James JT, Lam C-W, Warheit DB, Santamaria AB. Research strate-gies for safety evaluation of nanomaterials, Part IV: risk assessment of nanoparticles. Toxicol Sci2006, 89:42-50.
4. Thomas K, Aguar P, Kawasaki H, Morris M, Nakanishi J, Savage N. Strategies for safety evaluation of nano-materials, Part VIII: international efforts to develop risk-based safety evaluations for nanomaterials. Toxicol Sci2006, 92:23-32.
5. Maynard A.Is engineered nanomaterial exposure a myth?http://www.safenano.org/. 2007.
6. Ott W. Human exposure assessment: the birth of a new science.J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol 1995, 5:449-472.
7. Lioy P, Lebret E, Spengler J, Brauer M, Buckley T,Freeman N, Jantunen M, Kissel J, Lebowitz M, Maroni M, Moschandreas D, Nieuwenhuijsen M, Seifert B, Zmirou-Navier D. Defining exposure science.J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol2005, 15:463.
8. Environmental Defense (ED)-Dupont Nano Partner-ship.Nano risk framework. http://nanoriskframework. com/. 2007.
9. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).Progress toward safe nanotechnology in the workplace. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2007-123/. 2007.
10. International Council on Nanotechnology (ICON). Towards predicting nano-biointeractions: an inter-national assessment of nanotechnology environment,health and safety research needs. http:// nanoriskframe-work.com/. 2008.
11. National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI).Strategy for nanomaterial-related environmental, health and safety research. http://www.nano.gov/html/res/pubs.html.2008.
12. Woodrow Wilson Center (WWC). Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies. Consumer productsin-ventory. http://www.nanotechproject.org/inventories/consumer/. 2008.
13. Oberd̈orster G, Maynard A, Donaldson K, Castranova V, FitzpatrickJ,AusmanK,CarterJ,KarnB,Kreyling W, Lai D, Olin S, Monteiro-Riviere N, Warheit D, Yang H. Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: elements of a screening strategy. Part.Fibre Toxicol2005a, 2:8.
14. Oberd̈orster G, Oberd̈orster E, Oberd̈orster J. Nan-otoxicology: an emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles.Environ Health Perspect 2005b, 113:823-839.
15. Grassian V, Adamcakova-Dodd A, Pettibone J, O'Shaughnessy P, Thorne P: Inflammatory response of mice to manufactured titanium dioxide nanoparticles: comparison of size effects through different exposure routes.Nanotoxicology2007, 1:211.
16. Jiang J, Oberd̈orster G, Elder A, Gelein R, Mercer P, Biswas P. Does nanoparticle activity depend upon size and crystal phase?Nanotoxicology2008, 2:33.
17. Wittmaack K. In search of the most relevant parameter for quantifying lung inflammatory response to nanopar-ticle exposure: particle number, surface area, or what? Environ Health Perspect115:187-194.
18. Oberd̈orster G, Stone VA, Donaldson K. Toxicology of nanoparticles: a historical perspective.Nanotoxicology 2007, 1:2-25.
19. Warheit D, Laurence B, Reed K, Roach D, Reynolds G, Webb T. Comparative pulmonary toxicity assessment of single-walled carbon nanotubes in rats.Toxicol Sci 2004, 77:117-125.
20. Lam C-W, James J, McCluskey R, Hunter R. Pul-monary toxicity of single-wall carbon nanotubes in mice 7 and 90 days after intratracheal instillation. Toxicol Sci2004, 77:126-134.
21. Poland C, Duffin R, Kinloch I, Maynard A, Wallace W,Seaton A, Stone V, Brown S, MacNee W, Donaldson K. Carbon nanotubes introduced into the abdominal cavity of mice show asbestos-like pathogenicity in a pilot study.Nat Nanotechnol2008
22. Maynard AD: Nanotechnology: the next big ting, or much ado about nothing?Ann Occup Hyg2007,51:1-12.
23. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).Nan-otechnology white paper. www.epa.gov/osa/pdfs/ nanotech/epa-nanotechnology-whitepaper-0207.pdf.2007.
24. Westerhoff P.2006 progress report: fate, transforma-tion and toxicity of manufactured nanomaterials in drinking water. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer abstracts/ index.cfm/fuseaction/display.abstractDetail/abstract/ 7387/report/2006. 2006.
25. Monteiro-Riviere N. 2006 progress report: evaluat-ing nanoparticle interactions with skin. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncerabstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/display.abstractDetail/abstract/7178/report/2006. 2006.