Boyes William K, van Thriel Christoph
Neurological and Endocrine Toxicology Branch Public Health and Integrated Toxicology Division Center for Public Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research, Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, United States.
Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, TU Dortmund, Ardeystr. 67, 44139 Dortmund, Germany.
Chem Res Toxicol. 2020 May 18;33(5):1121-1144. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.0c00050. Epub 2020 Apr 14.
The remarkable advances coming about through nanotechnology promise to revolutionize many aspects of modern life; however, these advances come with a responsibility for due diligence to ensure that they are not accompanied by adverse consequences for human health or the environment. Many novel nanomaterials (having at least one dimension <100 nm) could be highly mobile if released into the environment and are also very reactive, which has raised concerns for potential adverse impacts including, among others, the potential for neurotoxicity. Several lines of evidence led to concerns for neurotoxicity, but perhaps none more than observations that inhaled nanoparticles impinging on the mucosal surface of the nasal epithelium could be internalized into olfactory receptor neurons and transported by axoplasmic transport into the olfactory bulbs without crossing the blood-brain barrier. From the olfactory bulb, there is concern that nanomaterials may be transported deeper into the brain and affect other brain structures. Of course, people will not be exposed to only engineered nanomaterials, but rather such exposures will occur in a complex mixture of environmental materials, some of which are incidentally generated particles of a similar inhalable size range to engineered nanomaterials. To date, most experimental studies of potential neurotoxicity of nanomaterials have not considered the potential exposure sources and pathways that could lead to exposure, and most studies of nanomaterial exposure have not considered potential neurotoxicity. Here, we present a review of potential sources of exposures to nanoparticles, along with a review of the literature on potential neurotoxicity of nanomaterials. We employ the linked concepts of an aggregate exposure pathway (AEP) and an adverse outcome pathway (AOP) to organize and present the material. The AEP includes a sequence of key events progressing from material sources, release to environmental media, external exposure, internal exposure, and distribution to the target site. The AOP begins with toxicant at the target site causing a molecular initiating event and, like the AEP, progress sequentially to actions at the level of the cell, organ, individual, and population. Reports of nanomaterial actions are described at every key event along the AEP and AOP, except for changes in exposed populations that have not yet been observed. At this last stage, however, there is ample evidence of population level effects from exposure to ambient air particles that may act similarly to engineered nanomaterials. The data give an overall impression that current exposure levels may be considerably lower than those reported experimentally to be neurotoxic. This impression, however, is tempered by the absence of long-term exposure studies with realistic routes and levels of exposure to address concerns for chronic accumulation of materials or damage. Further, missing across the board are "key event relationships", which are quantitative expressions linking the key events of either the AEP or the AOP, making it impossible to quantitatively project the likelihood of adverse neurotoxic effects from exposure to nanomaterials or to estimate margins of exposure for such relationships.
纳米技术带来的显著进步有望彻底改变现代生活的许多方面;然而,这些进步伴随着尽职调查的责任,以确保它们不会对人类健康或环境产生不利影响。许多新型纳米材料(至少有一个维度<100纳米)如果释放到环境中可能具有高度的流动性,并且也非常活跃,这引发了人们对潜在不利影响的担忧,其中包括神经毒性的可能性。有几条证据线索引发了对神经毒性的担忧,但可能没有比观察到吸入撞击鼻上皮粘膜表面的纳米颗粒可被内化到嗅觉受体神经元并通过轴浆运输进入嗅球而不穿过血脑屏障更令人担忧的了。从嗅球开始,人们担心纳米材料可能会被更深地运输到大脑中并影响其他脑结构。当然,人们不会仅接触工程纳米材料,而是这种接触会发生在环境材料的复杂混合物中,其中一些是偶然产生的颗粒,其可吸入尺寸范围与工程纳米材料相似。迄今为止,大多数关于纳米材料潜在神经毒性的实验研究都没有考虑可能导致接触的潜在暴露源和途径,并且大多数纳米材料接触研究也没有考虑潜在的神经毒性。在这里,我们对纳米颗粒的潜在暴露源进行综述,并对纳米材料潜在神经毒性的文献进行综述。我们采用综合暴露途径(AEP)和不良结局途径(AOP)的相关概念来组织和呈现这些材料。AEP包括一系列关键事件,从材料源、释放到环境介质、外部暴露、内部暴露以及分布到靶部位。AOP从靶部位的毒物引起分子起始事件开始,并且与AEP一样,依次进展到细胞、器官、个体和群体水平的作用。沿着AEP和AOP的每个关键事件都描述了纳米材料作用的报告,但尚未观察到的暴露人群的变化除外。然而,在最后这个阶段,有充分的证据表明接触环境空气颗粒对人群水平有影响,这些颗粒的作用可能与工程纳米材料类似。这些数据给人的总体印象是,当前的暴露水平可能远低于实验报告的具有神经毒性的水平。然而,由于缺乏针对实际接触途径和水平的长期暴露研究来解决对材料慢性积累或损害的担忧,这种印象有所缓和。此外,普遍缺少“关键事件关系”,即连接AEP或AOP关键事件的定量表达式,这使得无法定量预测接触纳米材料产生不良神经毒性效应的可能性,也无法估计此类关系的暴露余量。