The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Toxicity of Luminescent Silica Nanoparticles to Living Cells
Abstract
Luminescent nanomaterials can provide high-intensity and photostable luminescent signals when used as labeling materials for the determination of trace amounts of analytes. However, a major concern that has arisen is whether the nanomaterials cause toxic effects in living systems. Here, we address this problem through a systematic investigation of the cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of luminescent silica nanoparticles. These nanoparticles are intensely luminescent labeling materials for ultrasensitive determination of biological samples. The investigation of genotoxicity of the nanomaterials was carried out from two perspectives. First, the integrity of the DNA was examined by detecting DNA base modification, strand breaks, and increased DNA repair activity to recover the damage. Second, different sets of cellular DNAs, including nuclear DNA extracts and the whole genomic DNAs, were examined. Furthermore, to fully assess DNA damage by the nanoparticles, isolated genomic DNAs were directly exposed to the nanoparticles. The cytotoxicity of the nanoparticle was detected by measuring the cell proliferation rate, cell death, and death patterns (necrosis and apoptosis) after the nanoparticle treatments. Results show no significant toxic effects due to the luminescent nanoparticles at the molecular and cellular levels below a concentration of 0.1 mg/mL. Our study indicates that the luminescent silica nanoparticle is a promising labeling reagent for various biomedical applications.
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
Nanostructures in Biodiagnostics
Rosi, N. L., & Mirkin, C. A. (2005) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr030067f · Cited by 4,603
Oxidative DNA damage: mechanisms, mutation, and disease
Cooke, M. S., Evans, M. D., Dizdaroglu, M., & Lunec, J. (2003) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fj.02-0752rev · Cited by 3,245
On the Cyto‐Toxicity Caused by Quantum Dots
Shiohara, A., Hoshino, A., Hanaki, K., Suzuki, K., & Yamamoto, K. (2004) · Microbiology and Immunology · doi:10.1111/j.1348-0421.2004.tb03478.x · Cited by 385
Cited by
Applications of Nanoparticles in Biology
De, M., Ghosh, P. S., & Rotello, V. M. (2008) · Advanced Materials · doi:10.1002/adma.200703183 · Cited by 1,547
Mechanisms of genotoxicity. A review of in vitro and in vivo studies with engineered nanoparticles
Magdolenova, Z., Collins, A., Kumar, A., Dhawan, A., Stone, V., & Dusinska, M. (2014) · Nanotoxicology · doi:10.3109/17435390.2013.773464 · Cited by 616
He, Q., Zhang, J., Shi, J., Zhu, Z., Zhang, L., Bu, W., Guo, L., & Chen, Y. (2010) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2009.10.046 · Cited by 502
Analytical methods to assess nanoparticle toxicity
Marquis, B. J., Love, S. A., Braun, K. L., & Haynes, C. L. (2009) · The Analyst · doi:10.1039/b818082b · Cited by 406
In vitro and in vivo toxicity assessment of nanoparticles
Kumar, V., Sharma, N., & Maitra, S. S. (2017) · International Nano Letters · doi:10.1007/s40089-017-0221-3 · Cited by 391
Metadata
- Authors
- Jin, Y., Kannan, S., Wu, M., & Zhao, J. X.
- Venue
- Chemical Research in Toxicology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2007-07-13
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1126-1133
- ISSN
- 0893-228X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5010
- OpenAlex
- W2063578372
- Cited by
- 273
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 8.14
- 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.