Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 765

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Particokinetics In Vitro: Dosimetry Considerations for In Vitro Nanoparticle Toxicity Assessments

Open access
Teeguarden, Justin G., Hinderliter, Paul M., Orr, Galya, Thrall, Brian D., Pounds, Joel G.·2007·Toxicological Sciences

Abstract

The rapid growth in the use of in vitro methods for nanoparticle toxicity assessment has proceeded with limited consideration of the unique kinetics of these materials in solution. Particles in general and nanoparticles specifically, diffuse, settle, and agglomerate in cell culture media as a function of systemic and particle properties: media density and viscosity and particle size, shape, charge and density, for example. Cellular dose then is also a function of these factors as they determine the rate of transport of nanoparticles to cells in culture. Here we develop and apply the principles of dosimetry in vitro and outline an approach for simulation of nanoparticle particokinetics in cell culture systems. We illustrate that where equal mass concentrations (mug/ml) imply equal doses for dissimilar materials, the corresponding particle number or surface area concentration doses differ by orders of magnitude. More importantly, when rates of diffusional and gravitational particle delivery are accounted for, trends and magnitude of the cellular dose as a function of particle size and density differ significantly from those implied by "concentration" doses. For example, 15-nm silver nanoparticles appear approximately 4000 times more potent than micron-sized cadmium oxide particles on a cm(2)/ml media basis, but are only approximately 50 times more potent when differences in delivery to adherent cells are considered. We conclude that simple surrogates of dose can cause significant misinterpretation of response and uptake data for nanoparticles in vitro. Incorporating particokinetics and principles of dosimetry would significantly improve the basis for nanoparticle toxicity assessment, increasing the predictive power and scalability of such assays.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/toxsci/kfl165

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 765

Metadata

Authors
Teeguarden, J. G., Hinderliter, P. M., Orr, G., Thrall, B. D., & Pounds, J. G.
Venue
Toxicological Sciences
Published
2006-11-10
Volume
95
Issue
2
Pages
300-312
ISSN
  • 1096-0929 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-6080
OpenAlex
W2139820378
Cited by
765
References
2
FWCI
15.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Particokinetics In Vitro: Dosimetry Considerations for In Vitro Nanoparticle Toxicity Assessments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/toxsci/kfl165
The paper
Teeguarden, J. G., Hinderliter, P. M., Orr, G., Thrall, B. D., & Pounds, J. G. (2007). Particokinetics In Vitro: Dosimetry Considerations for In Vitro Nanoparticle Toxicity Assessments. Toxicological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfl165

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.