Review

The limits of testing particle-mediated oxidative stress in vitro in predicting diverse pathologies; relevance for testing of nanoparticles

Ken Donaldson¹ , Paul JA Borm² , Vincent Castranova³ and Mary Gulumian⁴

¹  MRC/University of Edinburgh Centre for Inflammation Research, ELEGI Colt Laboratory, Queen's Medical Research Institute, 47 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, EH16 4TJ, UK

²  Zuyd University, Nieuw Eyckholt 300, Heerlen, Limburg, 6400 AN, The Netherlands

³  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 1095 Willowdale Road, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA

⁴  National Institute for Occupational Health, P O Box 4788, Johannesburg 2000, University of the Witwatersrand, Witwatersrand, South Africa

author email corresponding author email

Particle and Fibre Toxicology 2009, 6:13doi:10.1186/1743-8977-6-13

Published:	27 April 2009

Abstract

In vitro studies with particles are a major staple of particle toxicology, generally used to investigate mechanisms and better understand the molecular events underlying cellular effects. However, there is ethical and financial pressure in nanotoxicology, the new sub-specialty of particle toxicology, to avoid using animals. Therefore an increasing amount of studies are being published using in vitro approaches and such studies require careful interpretation. We point out here that 3 different conventional pathogenic particle types, PM₁₀, asbestos and quartz, which cause diverse pathological effects, have been reported to cause very similar oxidative stress effects in cells in culture. We discuss the likely explanation and implications of this apparent paradox, and its relevance for testing in nanotoxicology.