The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantum Dot Cytotoxicity and Ways To Reduce It
Abstract
The dramatic increase in the use of nanoparticles (NP) in industry and research has raised questions about the potential toxicity of such materials. Unfortunately, not enough is known about how the novel, technologically-attractive properties of NPs correlate with the interactions that may take place at the nano/bio interface. The academic, industrial, and regulatory communities are actively seeking answers to the growing concerns on the impact of nanotechnology on humans. In this Account we adopt quantum dots (QDs) as an illustrative example of the difficulties associated with the development of a rational science-based approach to nanotoxicology. The optical properties of QDs are far superior to those of organic dyes in terms of emission and absorption bandwidths, quantum yield, and resistance to photobleaching. Moreover, QDs may be decorated with targeting moieties or drugs and, therefore, are candidates for site-specific medical imaging and for drug delivery, for example in cancer treatment. Earlier this year researchers demonstrated that QD-based imaging using monkeys caused no adverse effects although QDs accumulated in lymph nodes, bone marrow, liver, and spleen for up to 3 months after injection. Such persistence of QDs in live animals does, however, raise concerns about the safety of using QDs both in the laboratory and in the clinic. Researchers anticipate that QDs will be increasingly used not only in clinical applications but also in various manufactured products. For example, QD-solar cells have emerged as viable contenders to complement or replace dye-sensitized solar cells; CdTe/CdS thin film cells have already captured approximately 10 percent of the global market, and in addition, QDs can serve as components of sensors and as emitting materials in LEDs. Given the clear indications that QDs will inevitably become components of a wide range of manufactured and consumer products, researchers and policy makers need to understand the possible health risks associated with exposure to QDs. In this Account, we initially review the known mechanisms by which QDs can damage cells, including oxidative stress elicited by reactive oxygen species (ROS). We discuss lesser-known impairments induced in cells by nanomolar to picomolar concentrations of QDs, which imply that cadmium-containing QDs can exert genotoxic, epigenetic, and metalloestrogenic effects. These observations strongly suggest that minute concentrations of QDs could be sufficient to cause long lasting, even transgenerational, effects. We also consider various modes by which humans could be exposed to QDs in their work or through the environment. Although considerable advances have been made in enhancing the stability and overall quality of QDs, over time they can partially degrade in the environment or in biological systems, and eventually cause small, but cumulative undesirable effects. A combination of toxicological, genetic, epigenetic and imaging approaches is required to create comprehensive guidelines for evaluating the nanotoxicity of nanomaterials, including QDs. Prior to biological investigations with these materials, an indispensible step must be the full characterization of NPs by complementary techniques. Specifically, the concentration, size, charge, and ligand stability of NPs in biological media must be known if we are to understand fully how the properties of nanoparticles and of their biological environment contribute to cytotoxicity.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Free Radicals in Biology and Medicine
Halliwell, B., & Gutteridge, J. M. C. (2015) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198717478.001.0001 · Cited by 8,990
Endothelial Mitochondria: Contributing to Vascular Function and Disease
Davidson, S. M., & Duchen, M. R. (2007) · Circulation Research · doi:10.1161/01.res.0000261970.18328.1d · Cited by 381
Cited by
Smart micro/nanoparticles in stimulus-responsive drug/gene delivery systems
Karimi, M., Ghasemi, A., Sahandi Zangabad, P., Rahighi, R., Moosavi Basri, S. M., Mirshekari, H., Amiri, M., Shafaei Pishabad, Z., Aslani, A., Bozorgomid, M., et al. (2016) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/c5cs00798d · Cited by 1,519
Quantum dots: bright and versatile in vitro and in vivo fluorescence imaging biosensors
Wegner, K. D., & Hildebrandt, N. (2015) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/c4cs00532e · Cited by 984
Zhao, S., Lan, M., Zhu, X., Xue, H., Ng, T.-W., Meng, X., Lee, C.-S., Wang, P., & Zhang, W. (2015) · ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces · doi:10.1021/acsami.5b03228 · Cited by 649
Meta-analysis of cellular toxicity for cadmium-containing quantum dots
Oh, E., Liu, R., Nel, A., Gemill, K. B., Bilal, M., Cohen, Y., & Medintz, I. L. (2016) · Nature Nanotechnology · doi:10.1038/nnano.2015.338 · Cited by 502
Antibody fragments as nanoparticle targeting ligands: a step in the right direction
Richards, D. A., Maruani, A., & Chudasama, V. (2017) · Chemical Science · doi:10.1039/c6sc02403c · Cited by 294
Design and development of fluorescent nanostructures for bioimaging
Chen, M., & Yin, M. (2014) · Progress in Polymer Science · doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2013.11.001 · Cited by 289
Nanomaterials for Photo-Based Diagnostic and Therapeutic Applications
Menon, J. U., Jadeja, P., Tambe, P., Vu, K., Yuan, B., & Nguyen, K. T. (2013) · Theranostics · doi:10.7150/thno.5327 · Cited by 284
Carbon Dots as an Effective Fluorescent Sensing Platform for Metal Ion Detection
Yoo, D., Park, Y., Cheon, B., & Park, M.-H. (2019) · Nanoscale Research Letters · doi:10.1186/s11671-019-3088-6 · Cited by 266
Metadata
- Authors
- Winnik, F. M., & Maysinger, D.
- Venue
- Accounts of Chemical Research
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2012-07-09
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 672-680
- ISSN
- 0001-4842 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-4898
- OpenAlex
- W2090772513
- Cited by
- 330
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 14.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.