Comparative assessment of nanomaterial definitions and safety evaluation considerations.

Nanomaterials continue to bring promising advances to science and technology. In concert have come calls for increased regulatory oversight to ensure their appropriate identification and evaluation, which has led to extensive discussions about nanomaterial definitions. Numerous nanomaterial definitions have been proposed by government, industry, and standards organizations. We conducted a comprehensive comparative assessment of existing nanomaterial definitions put forward by governments to highlight their similarities and differences. We found that the size limits used in different definitions were inconsistent, as were considerations of other elements, including agglomerates and aggregates, distributional thresholds, novel properties, and solubility. Other important differences included consideration of number size distributions versus weight distributions and natural versus intentionally-manufactured materials. Overall, the definitions we compared were not in alignment, which may lead to inconsistent identification and evaluation of nanomaterials and could have adverse impacts on commerce and public perceptions of nanotechnology. We recommend a set of considerations that future discussions of nanomaterial definitions should consider for describing materials and assessing their potential for health and environmental impacts using risk-based approaches within existing assessment frameworks. Our intent is to initiate a dialogue aimed at achieving greater clarity in identifying those nanomaterials that may require additional evaluation, not to propose a formal definition.

[1]  B. Lehnert,et al.  Correlation between particle size, in vivo particle persistence, and lung injury. , 1994, Environmental health perspectives.

[2]  Y. Mai,et al.  Effects of particle size, particle/matrix interface adhesion and particle loading on mechanical properties of particulate–polymer composites , 2008 .

[3]  António Portugal,et al.  Sol‐gel synthesis and washing of amorphous g‐FeO(OH) xerogels , 2012 .

[4]  Benjamin Gilbert,et al.  Comparison of the mechanism of toxicity of zinc oxide and cerium oxide nanoparticles based on dissolution and oxidative stress properties. , 2008, ACS nano.

[5]  Andrew D. Maynard,et al.  Don't define nanomaterials , 2011, Nature.

[6]  Jürgen Pauluhn,et al.  Retrospective analysis of 4-week inhalation studies in rats with focus on fate and pulmonary toxicity of two nanosized aluminum oxyhydroxides (boehmite) and pigment-grade iron oxide (magnetite): the key metric of dose is particle mass and not particle surface area. , 2009, Toxicology.

[7]  D. Sparks,et al.  Nanominerals, Mineral Nanoparticles, and Earth Systems , 2008, Science.

[8]  J. James,et al.  Research strategies for safety evaluation of nanomaterials, part IV: risk assessment of nanoparticles. , 2006, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[9]  Dik van de Meent,et al.  Considerations on the EU definition of a nanomaterial: science to support policy making. , 2013, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[10]  Gibson Peter,et al.  Towards a review of the EC Recommendation for a definition of the term "nanomaterial"Part 2: Assessment of collected information concerning the experience with the defintion , 2014 .

[11]  Kevin Robbie,et al.  Nanomaterials and nanoparticles: Sources and toxicity , 2007, Biointerphases.

[12]  Sarbajit Banerjee,et al.  Humic acid-induced silver nanoparticle formation under environmentally relevant conditions. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[13]  Paul A Schulte,et al.  Workshop report: strategies for setting occupational exposure limits for engineered nanomaterials. , 2014, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[14]  Patricia A Holden,et al.  An assessment of fluorescence- and absorbance-based assays to study metal-oxide nanoparticle ROS production and effects on bacterial membranes. , 2013, Small.

[15]  J M Davis,et al.  The role of clearance and dissolution in determining the durability or biopersistence of mineral fibers. , 1994, Environmental health perspectives.

[16]  Ron C. Hardman A Toxicologic Review of Quantum Dots: Toxicity Depends on Physicochemical and Environmental Factors , 2005, Environmental health perspectives.

[17]  H. Muranko,et al.  Studies of Robustness of Industrial Aciniform Aggregates and Agglomerates—Carbon Black and Amorphous Silicas: A Review Amplified by New Data , 2006, Journal of occupational and environmental medicine.

[18]  Margaret A. Hamburg,et al.  FDA's Approach to Regulation of Products of Nanotechnology , 2012, Science.

[19]  Scott C. Brown,et al.  Toward Advancing Nano-Object Count Metrology: A Best Practice Framework , 2013, Environmental health perspectives.

[20]  Michael Voigt,et al.  Scalable production of graphene sheets by mechanical delamination , 2010 .

[21]  Ord,et al.  Nanotechnology White Paper , 2014 .

[22]  Y. Oytam,et al.  Small amounts of zinc from zinc oxide particles in sunscreens applied outdoors are absorbed through human skin. , 2010, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[23]  Hermann Stamm Risk factors: Nanomaterials should be defined , 2011, Nature.

[24]  Monika Maier,et al.  Does Lung Surfactant Promote Disaggregation of Nanostructured Titanium Dioxide? , 2006, Journal of occupational and environmental medicine.

[25]  J. Heyder,et al.  Instillation of Six Different Ultrafine Carbon Particles Indicates a Surface Area Threshold Dose for Acute Lung Inflammation in Mice , 2005, Environmental health perspectives.

[26]  Mark R. Wiesner,et al.  Ultrasonic dispersion of nanoparticles for environmental, health and safety assessment – issues and recommendations , 2011, Nanotoxicology.

[27]  Robert I. MacCuspie,et al.  Identification and Avoidance of Potential Artifacts and Misinterpretations in Nanomaterial Ecotoxicity Measurements , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[28]  G. Lowry,et al.  Towards a definition of inorganic nanoparticles from an environmental, health and safety perspective. , 2009, Nature nanotechnology.

[29]  Simone Morais,et al.  Atmospheric Nanoparticles and Their Impacts on Public Health , 2013 .

[30]  B. Lehnert,et al.  Correlation Between Particle Size, in Vivo Particle Persistence, and Lung Injury , 1994 .

[31]  G Oberdörster,et al.  Dosimetric principles for extrapolating results of rat inhalation studies to humans, using an inhaled Ni compound as an example. , 1989, Health physics.

[32]  Sandra K. Young Overview of Sol-Gel Science and Technology , 2002 .

[33]  J. Everitt,et al.  Pulmonary responses of mice, rats, and hamsters to subchronic inhalation of ultrafine titanium dioxide particles. , 2004, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[34]  Craig A. Poland,et al.  Nanotoxicity: challenging the myth of nano-specific toxicity. , 2013, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[35]  Michael P Holsapple,et al.  Forum series: research strategies for safety evaluation of nanomaterials. , 2005, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[36]  M. Wiesner,et al.  Comparison of electrokinetic properties of colloidal fullerenes (n-C60) formed using two procedures. , 2005, Environmental science & technology.

[37]  John P. Holdren,et al.  Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Policy Principles for the U.S. Decision-Making Concerning Regulation and Oversight of Applications of Nanotechnology and Nanomaterials , 2011 .

[38]  Jürgen Pauluhn,et al.  Subchronic 13-week inhalation exposure of rats to multiwalled carbon nanotubes: toxic effects are determined by density of agglomerate structures, not fibrillar structures. , 2010, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[39]  Alan J. Hurd,et al.  Review of sol-gel thin film formation , 1992 .

[40]  K. Wittmaack In Search of the Most Relevant Parameter for Quantifying Lung Inflammatory Response to Nanoparticle Exposure: Particle Number, Surface Area, or What? , 2006, Environmental health perspectives.

[41]  Karluss Thomas,et al.  Research strategies for safety evaluation of nanomaterials, part V: role of dissolution in biological fate and effects of nanoscale particles. , 2006, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[42]  Tsun-Jen Cheng,et al.  Pulmonary toxicity of inhaled nanoscale and fine zinc oxide particles: Mass and surface area as an exposure metric , 2011, Inhalation toxicology.

[43]  Inge Mangelsdorf,et al.  Change in agglomeration status and toxicokinetic fate of various nanoparticles in vivo following lung exposure in rats , 2012, Inhalation toxicology.

[44]  Aaron J. Slowey,et al.  Rate of formation and dissolution of mercury sulfide nanoparticles: The dual role of natural organic matter , 2010 .

[45]  Witold Łojkowski,et al.  Zinc oxide nanoparticles toxicity to Daphnia magna: size‐dependent effects and dissolution , 2014, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[46]  G Vecchio,et al.  In vivo assessment of CdSe-ZnS quantum dots: coating dependent bioaccumulation and genotoxicity. , 2012, Nanoscale.

[47]  Gary F. Bennett,et al.  Advances in air sampling : By the American Council of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI, 1988, ISBN 0-87371-115-7, 300 pp., US$ 49.95. , 1990 .

[48]  Claudia Fruijtier-Pölloth The toxicological mode of action and the safety of synthetic amorphous silica-a nanostructured material. , 2012, Toxicology.

[49]  Hugh J. Byrne,et al.  Concern-driven integrated approaches to nanomaterial testing and assessment – report of the NanoSafety Cluster Working Group 10 , 2013, Nanotoxicology.