Journal of NanomaterialsVolume 2012 (2012), Article ID 964381, 36 pagesdoi:10.1155/2012/964381

Review Article

Toxicological Effects of Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticles: A Review of In Vivo Studies

Ivo Iavicoli, Veruscka Leso, and Antonio Bergamaschi

Istituto di Medicina del Lavoro, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo Francesco Vito 1, 00168 Rome, Italy

Received 2 October 2011; Accepted 14 February 2012

Academic Editor: Paul A. Schulte

Copyright © 2012 Ivo Iavicoli et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract.

The essence of nanotechnology is the production of nanoparticles (NPs) with unique physicochemical properties allowing worldwide application in new structures, materials, and devices. The consequently increasing human exposure to NPs has raised concerns regarding their health and safety profiles. Titanium dioxide (TiO₂) has been reported to induce adverse pulmonary responses in exposed animals. However, the potential more dangerous biological activities of TiO₂ NPs compared to their fine-sized counterparts are not fully understood. Therefore, this work is aimed to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the toxic effects induced by TiO₂ NPs in in vivo experiments. It is intended to deeply understand the toxicological behaviour of TiO₂ NPs and to predict potential human health effects. Moreover, it may be an instrument to extrapolate relevant data for human risk evaluation and management and to identify those critical aspects that deserve great attention in future population and epidemiologic research.

1. Introduction

Nanotechnology is the manipulation of matter on a near-atomic scale to produce new structures, materials, and devises. It has became an important industry in the twenty-first century, and the U.S. National Science Foundation estimated it will grow into a trillion-dollar business, employing millions of workers worldwide, within the next decade [1–3].

The essence of nanotechnology is the synthesis of engineered nanoparticles (NPs) that exhibit characteristics, such as small size, large surface area to mass ratio, shape, crystallinity, surface charge, reactive surface groups, dissolution rate, state of agglomeration, or dispersal that confer them properties substantially different from those of the bulk particles of the same composition [4–6]. These properties offer great opportunities for the development of new NP industrial applications increasing their worldwide distribution and enhancing the likelihood of environmental and human exposure [5, 7].

Considerable work has been carried out to advance nanotechnology and its applications. Nevertheless, our understanding of the general and occupational health and safety aspects of NPs is still in its formative phase and greater effort is needed to understand how NPs interact with the human body [8, 9]. In this regard, nanotoxicology and nano-risk have been attracting the increasing attention of toxicologists and regulatory scientists [10] particularly in relation to the unique properties of NPs that may render them potentially more dangerous than their fine-sized counterpart and may cause unexpected adverse health effects to exposed people [6, 11].

Titanium dioxide (TiO₂) is an example of a fine, white, crystalline, odorless, low-solubility powder which was considered to exhibit relatively low toxicity [12–16]. It is a natural, thermally stable and nonflammable, nonsilicate mineral oxide found primarily in the form of the minerals rutile, anatase, brookite, and as the iron-containing mineral ilmenite [17–21]. It has excellent physicochemical properties, such as good fatigue strength, resistance to corrosion, machineability, biocompatibility, whitening and photocatalysis, as well as excellent optical performance and electrical properties [22, 23]. With regard to its potential adverse health effects, several studies have defined TiO₂, at least under nonoverload conditions, as biologically inactive and physiologically inert in both humans and animals and thus as little risk to humans [24–27]. Pulmonary inflammation, fibrosis, epithelial hyperplasia, and tumorigenesis were reported in animals under conditions of substantial TiO₂ particle lung burden due to sufficiently high dose and/or duration of exposure [13, 15, 28, 29]. In 2006, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), classified and in 2010 reassessed TiO₂ as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” on the basis of the sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals and inadequate evidence in humans (Group 2B) [28, 29].

TiO₂ is a versatile compound that has broadly been used in nanoparticulate form [21]. According to the National Nanotechnology Initiative of America, nanosized TiO₂ particles are among those most widely manufactured on a global scale [30]. TiO₂ NPs are widely used in paints, printing ink, rubber, paper, cosmetics, sunscreens, car materials, cleaning air products, industrial photocatalytic processes, and decomposing organic matters in wastewater due to their unique physical, chemical, and biological properties (including the inherent advantages of physical stability, anticorrosion and nanoscale-enhanced photocatalysis) [31]. However, the toxicological profile of TiO₂ NPs is not completely understood and several concerns have emerged on the potential undesirable effects of the TiO₂ NP properties, in regard to the harmful interactions with biological systems and the environment [11]. The recently recognized occupational carcinogenic potential of the inhaled TiO₂ NPs have ulteriourly enhanced these scientific concerns [15]. Therefore, an appropriate assessment of the risks for the general and occupational exposed population requiring TiO₂ NP hazard identification and dose-response data seems necessary [32].

In this regard, our previous work [33] reviewed several toxic effects of NPs assessed by in vitro experiments. These studies represent a valid instrument to investigate TiO₂ NP, induced cellular changes at biochemical and molecular levels and to determine their underlying mechanistic processes. Moreover, providing interesting information about doses of exposure and endpoint parameters to evaluate, this kind of investigation constitutes a significant step in planning animal research. Unfortunately, several limitations inherent to in vitro assay/cell culture systems have appeared in simulating the complex biological effects of particles administered to experimental animals. These include, but are not limited to, unrealistic particle dose, selection of cell types for simulating the different system microenvironments (single-cell culture systems or coculture systems), particle/cell exposure interactions in culture versus biological fluids, time course of effects represented by 1-, 4-, 24-, or 48-hour incubation in vitro versus acute or chronic exposure in vivo, and appropriate end points for hazard evaluation [34]. These biases do not allow to obtain data that may be representative of human exposure/effects and applicable for a correct population risk assessment.

Therefore, in the present review, we will provide a comprehensive evaluation of the current knowledge regarding the toxic effects induced by TiO₂ NPs on organ systems investigated in in vivo studies. This overview is intended to be a useful tool to gain a thorough insight into the toxicological profile of TiO₂ NPs and to predict potential human health effects. Moreover, it may reveal itself as a valid instrument to extrapolate relevant data for human risk evaluation and management and to identify those critical aspects that deserve great attention in future population and epidemiologic research.

2. In Vivo Studies

2.1. Respiratory System

Considering the relevance of the respiratory system as a route for TiO₂ NP exposure in humans, the scientific community has focused on the toxicological effects of these NPs on animal respiratory models. Such experiments provide the basis to obtain more detail data regarding the hazard of these NPs and to extrapolate evaluations for a correct human risk assessment, in particular, in relation to the characteristics of the particles. Indeed, several animal pulmonary studies were carried out to clarify the role played by TiO₂ form, particle size, shape, surface area, and chemistry in determining inflammatory responses, particle lung distribution, and carcinogenic effects (Table 1).

Table 1: In vivo studies that investigated the adverse effects of TiO₂ NPs on respiratory system.

Respiratory system

References
Crystal phase composition (particle size in nm)
Type of exposure
Type and number of animals
Results

Takenaka et al., 1986 [52]
Anatase TiO₂ (15–40)
Inhalation: aerosols of 8.6 mg/m³ TiO₂ for 7 hr/day, 5 day/wk for up to 1 year.
24 female Wistar rats
Lung burden: TiO₂ was found in macrophages and in the perivascular spaces.

Ferin et al., 1992 [53]
Rutile TiO₂ (12; 230) Anatase TiO₂ (21; 250)
Intratracheal instillation: all TiO₂: 500 μg; 21 nm TiO₂: 65–1000 μg/rat; 250 nm TiO₂: 1000 μg/rat. Inhalation:  mg/m³ 21 nm TiO₂;  mg/m³ 250 nm TiO₂ for 6 h/day, 5 day/wk for up to 12 wks.
Instillation study: 4–8 male Fischer 344 rats Inhalation study: 4 male Fischer 344 rats per group.
Instillation study: unlavagable lung burden decreased from 12 nm to 250 nm particles. Inhalation study: greater 21 nm TiO₂ NP concentration in the interstitium, epithelial cells, and alveolar space.

Basic intratracheal instillation: 500 μg of 250 and 20 nm TiO₂.
Basic instillation: 4 male Fischer 344 rats per group.
Basic instillation: higher lung retained amount and greater inflammatory response in the 20 nm TiO₂ NP treatment.

Oberdorster et al., 1992 [54]
Anatase TiO₂ (~20; ~250) Rutile TiO₂ (~12; ~220)
Intratracheal reinstillation:  μg 20 nm free TiO₂,  μg, 20 nm TiO₂ phagocitized by AMs, 100 μg serum coated particles,  AMs,  PMNs.
Reinstillation: 4–10 male Fischer 344 rats per group.
Reinstillation: greater amount of free particles retained in lavaged lungs.

Intratracheal dose-response: 500, 1000 μg 250 nm TiO₂; 65–1000 μg 20 nm TiO₂; 500 μg 220 nm TiO₂; 500 μg 12 nm TiO₂.

Dose-response: 20 nm TiO₂ NPs caused a dose-dependent PMN lung influx.

Oberdorster et al., 1994 [55]
Anatase TiO₂ (20; 250)
Inhalation: aerosols of  mg/m³ 20 nm TiO₂ and  mg/m³ 250 nm TiO₂ for 6 hr/day, 5 day/wk for up to 12 wks.
64 male Fischer 344 rats
Inflammatory action: AMs, PMNs, TPC increased in BAL. Pulmonary retention: increased after 20 nm TiO₂. Histology: lung fibrosis after 20 nm TiO₂.

Heinreich et al., 1995 [56]
P25 Degussa TiO₂ (15–40)
Inhalation: 10 mg/m³ TiO₂ for 18 hr a day for 24 (rats) and 13.5 (mice) months.
100 female Wistar rats 80 NMRI mice
Rats: adenocarcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas, adenomas increased. Mice: no differences in tumor rates.

Baggs et al., 1997 [57]
Pigment-grade TiO₂ (250) Degussa TiO₂ (20)
Inhalation: aerosols of 22.3 mg/m³ of 250 nm TiO₂ and 23.5 mg/m³ of 20 nm TiO₂ for 6 hr/day, 5 day/wk for up to 12 wks.
3-4 male Fischer 344 rats per group
Histology: alveolar epithelial thickness and septal fibrosis after both TiO₂ treatments.

Zhang et al., 1998 [58]
TiO₂ (28)
Intratracheal instillation: 1 mg TiO₂.
4–6 male Wistar rats per group
Inflammatory action: TCC, NEUs, AMs, TPC, and LDH increased in BAL.

Afaq et al., 1998 [59]
TiO₂ (30)
Intratracheal instillation: 2 mg TiO₂ per animal.
6 female Albino rats per group
Inflammatory action: AMs, ACP, and LDH increased in BAL. Oxidative stress: LPO and antioxidant activities increased

Oberdorster et al., 2000 [60]
TiO₂ (20; 250)
Intratracheal instillation: no more detailed
Rats Mice
Inflammatory action: NEUs increased after 20 nm TiO₂.

Höhr et al., 2002 [61]
Native or methylated TiO₂ (20–30; 180)
Intratracheal instillation: equivalent mass (1 or 6 mg) and surface doses (100, 500, 600 and 3000 cm²) of TiO₂ per animal.
5 female Wistar rats per group
Inflammatory action: native TiO₂ NPs increased TCC, PMNs, TPC, ALP, LDH, GGT, NAG and β glucuronidase in BAL.

Bermudez et al., 2004 [49]
P25 Degussa TiO₂ (21)
Inhalation: aerosols of 0.5–10 mg/m³ TiO₂ for 6 hr/day, 5 days/week, for 13 weeks.
Groups of 25 animals for each species: Female 3C3F1/CrlBR mice; CDF (F344)/CrlBR rats; Lak:LVG (SYR) BR hamsters.
Lung burdens: equivalent in rats and mice, lower in hamsters. Inflammatory action: increase in TCC, AMs, NEUs, LYMs (rats and mice); TPC and LDH in BAL (rats); only NEUs in hamsters; Histology: terminal bronchiolar and alveolar cell replication.

Renwick et al., 2004 [62]
TiO₂ (29; 250)
Intratracheal instillation: 125, 500 μg TiO₂.
Male Wistar rats
Inflammatory action: NEUs, GGT, TPC, LDH increased after 29 nm TiO₂ in BAL. AM phagocytotic ability: decreased.

Warheit et al., 2006 [39]
Rutile pigment grade TiO₂ (300) Anatase TiO₂ rods (length: 92–233; wide: 20–35) Anatase TiO₂ dots (5.8–6.1)
Intratracheal instillation: 1, 5 mg/kg TiO₂.
5 male Crl:CD(SD)IGS BR rats per group
Inflammatory action: increase in NEUs (all particles) and LDH (TiO₂ rods). Histology: TiO₂-containing aggregated macrophages in lung (all particles).

Warheit et al., 2007 [44, 45]
~98% rutile TiO₂, 2% alumina (~100) ~88 wt% rutile TiO₂, ~7 wt% amorphous silica, ~5 wt% alumina (~100) P25 Degussa TiO₂ (~25) ~99% rutile TiO₂, ~1% alumina (382 in water)
Intratrachel instillation: 1, 5 mg/kg TiO₂.
4-5 male Crl:CD(SD)IGS BR rats per group
Inflammatory action: NEUs, LDH, and microprotein increased in BAL by P25 TiO₂Cell proliferation: airway and lung parenchymal cells proliferation increased after P25 TiO₂. Histology: AM accumulation with tissue thickening after P25 TiO₂.

Chen et al., 2006 [42]
Rutile TiO₂ (21) TiO₂ (180–250)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.1, 0.5 mg TiO₂.
6 male ICR mice per group
Lung morphology: emphysematous change and alveolar epithelial thickness after 21 nm TiO₂ NPs. Apoptosis: increased in AMs and PNEs.

Grassian et al., 2007 [41]
Anatase TiO₂ (3.5 ± 1.0)
Inhalation: aerosols of 0.77, 7.22 mg/m³ TiO₂ for 4 hr (acute exposure); and  mg/m³ TiO₂ for 4 hr/day for 10 days (subacute exposure).
6 male C57Bl/6 mice per group
Acute exposure: TCC and AMs increased in BAL. Subacute exposure: AMs increased in BAL.

Li et al., 2007 [35]
Anatase TiO₂ (3) TiO₂ (20)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.4–40 mg/kg TiO₂.
5 Male Kunming mice per group
BAL biochemical parameters: TPC, ALB, ALP, and ACP increased by both TiO₂. Histology: alveolar wall thickening and destruction.

Geiser et al., 2005 [63]
TiO₂ (4)
Inhalation: 10 rats were exposed to 0.11 mg/m³ TiO₂ aerosols for 1 hr.
10 male WKY/NCrl BR rats
TiO₂ distribution: luminal side of airways/alveoli (79.3%), epithelial or endothelial cells (4.6%), connective tissue (4.8%), capillaries (11.3%).

Mühlfeld et al., 2007 [64]

See Geiser et al., 2005 [63]

TiO₂ distribution: connective tissue and the capillary lumen were the preferential target of NPs at 1 and 24 hr, respectively.

Nemmar et al., 2008 [43]
Rutile TiO₂ nanorods (4–6)
Intratracheal instillation: 1, 5 mg/kg TiO₂
6-7 male Wistar rats per group
Inflammatory action: AMs, PMNs increased in BAL. Tissue injury: edema in lung and heart.

Larsen et al., 2010 [65]
TiO₂ (28)
Intraperitoneal injections: immunization with 1 μg OVA alone or in combination with either 2, 10, 50 or 250 μg TiO₂.
7-8 inbred female BALB/cJ mice per group
OVA-specific antibodies in serum: TiO₂ increased IgE and IgG1 levels compared to the OVA-controls. Inflammatory action: EOSs, NEUs, LYMs, IL-4, and IL-5 increased in BAL.

Hamilton et al., 2009 [37]
Anatase TiO₂ nanospheres (60 ~ 200) Anatase TiO₂ long nanobelts (width: 60 ~ 300 nm; length 15 ~ 30 nm) Anatase TiO₂ short nanobelts (width: 60 ~ 300; length 0.8–4 μm)
Pharyngeal aspiration: 30 μg/mouse TiO₂.
Male C57BL/6 mice
Inflammatory action: cathepsins, IL-1β, IL-18 increased after long nanobelts aspiration.

Kobayashi et al., 2009 [38]
Anatase TiO₂ (4.9) (1st and 2nd experiment) Anatase TiO₂ (23.4) Anatase TiO₂ (154.2)
Intratracheal instillation: 5 mg/kg TiO2.
5 male Crl: CD (SD) rats per group
Inflammatory action:     1st: 4.9 and 23.4 nm TiO₂ NPs increased TCC, NEUs, LDH;     2nd: agglomerated TiO₂ increased TCC, NEUs, LDH. Histology: epithelium hypertrophy in all treated groups.

Van Ravenzwaay et al., 2009 [66]
Anatase-rutile TiO₂ mixture (20–30) Rutile TiO₂ (200)
Inhalation: aerosols of 100 and 250 mg/m³ uncoated and pigmentary TiO₂, respectively for 6 h/day on 5 consecutive days. Intravenous injections: 5 mg/kg.
3–6 male Wistar rats (strain Crl:WI (Han) per group
TiO₂ distribution: lung and mediastinal lymph node after inhalation; mostly liver and spleen after injection. Inflammatory action: both TiO₂ increased TCC, PMNs, TPC, ALP, LDH, GGT, NAG in BAL.

Ma-Hock et al., 2009 [67]
Rutile-anatase TiO₂ mixture (25.1)
Inhalation: aerosols of 2–50 mg/m³ TiO₂ for 6 hr/day for 5 days.
5-6 male Wistar rats (strain Crl: WI (Han)) per group
Inflammatory action: PMNs, GGT, TPC, LDH, ALP, NAG increased in BAL. Cell replication: increased in bronchi and bronchioles.

Liu et al., 2009 [36]
Anatase TiO₂ (5) P25 Degussa TiO₂ (21) Rutile TiO₂ (50)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.5–50 mg/kg.
12 male and female Sprague Dawley rats per group
Inflammatory action: LDH and ALP increased in lung by 5 and 50 nm TiO₂. Histology: inflammatory infiltration, alveolar wall thickening. AM phagocytic ability: altered by 5 and 50 nm TiO₂.

Sager et al., 2008 [12]
P25 TiO₂ (21) Rutile TiO₂ (1 μm)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.26–1.04 mg/rat for 21 nm TiO₂ and 5.35–21.41 mg/rat for 1 μm TiO₂.
Male Fischer CDF (F344/DuCrl) rats
Inflammatory action: both TiO₂ increased PMNs, LDH, ALB, TNFα, IL-1β, MIP2. Oxidative stress: increased by both TiO₂.

Sager and Castranova, 2009 [68]
P25 TiO₂ (21)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.26–1.04 mg/rat TiO₂.
8 male Fischer CDF (F344/DuCrl) rats per group
Inflammatory action: increase in PMNs, ALB, and LDH in BAL.

Park et al., 2009 [69]
P25 TiO₂ (21)
Intratracheal instillation: 5, 20, 50 mg/kg TiO₂.
10–12 ICR mice per group
Inflammatory action: IL-1, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-12, IFN-γ, IL4, IL-5, IL-10, and IgE increased in BAL. Histology: inflammatory proteins, granulomas. Gene expression: upregulation of genes involved in antigen presentation and immune cell chemotaxis.

Chen et al., 2009 [22]
Anatase TiO₂ (80–110)
Intraperitoneal injections: 324–2592 mg/kg TiO₂.
10 male and female ICR mice per group
Histology: alveolar septal thickening and interstitial pneumonia.

Moon et al., 2010 [47]
P25 TiO₂ (21)
Intraperitoneal injections: 40 mg/kg TiO₂ alone or 30 min after 5 mg/kg LPS injection.
10 BALB/c mice per group
Inflammatory action: NEUs, TPC; TNF-α, IL-1β, MIP2 increased by TiO₂ or TiO2 + LPS.

Rossi et al., 2010 [70]
Rutile TiO₂ (<5 μm) Rutile-anatase TiO₂ mixture (30–40) Anatase TiO₂ (<25) Silica coated rutile TiO₂ (~) Anatase TiO₂/brookite (21)
Inhalation:  mg/m³ TiO₂ for 2 hr; 2 hr on 4 consecutive days; 2 hr on 4 consecutive days for 4 wks.
8 female BALB/c/Sca mice per group
Inflammatory action: NEUs in BAL, CXCL1 lung tissue, TNF-α in AMs increased by silica TiO₂.

Rossi et al., 2010 [71]
Silica coated rutile TiO₂ (~10 × 40) Rutile TiO₂ (<5 μm)
Inhalation:  mg/m³ TiO₂ for 2 hr a day, 3 days a wk, for 4 wks.
8 female BALB/c/Sca mice per group
Inflammatory action: EOSs, LYMs, AMs, PAS+ globet cells, IL-1β, TNF-α, IL-4, -13, -10 decreased by silica TiO₂. Airway reactivity: decreased by silica TiO₂; increased by fine TiO₂

Scuri et al., 2010 [72]
P25 Degussa TiO₂ (21)
Inhalation: 12 mg/m³ TiO₂ for 5.6 hr a day, for 3 consecutive days.
29 male and female Fischer 344 rats
Neurotrophin expression: NGF, BDNF and their receptors increased in 2 day and 2 wk old rats. Airway resistance: increased in 2 wk old mice.

Li et al., 2010 [73]
Anatase TiO₂ (3)
Intratracheal instillation: 3.3 mg/kg TiO₂ once a wk for 4 wks.
13 male Kunming mice per group
Inflammatory action: ACP, ALP increased in BAL. Histology: destroyed alveolar walls.

Liu et al., 2010 [74]
TiO₂ (5) TiO₂ (200)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.5–50 mg/kg TiO₂
3 male and 3 female Sprague-Dawley rats per group
AM phagocytic and chemotactic ability: reduced by TiO₂ NPs.

Tang et al., 2010 [75]
TiO₂ (5)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.8–20 mg/kg TiO₂.
8 male Sprague Dawley rats per group
TiO₂ NP aggregation: present in lung at the lowest doses. Histology: lung gaps expanded, hyperemia

Tang et al., 2011 [40]
Anatase TiO₂ (5±1)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.8–20 mg/kg TiO₂.
8 male Sprague Dawley rats per group
Histology: AM increase, lung gaps expanded, hyperemia, alveolar thickness.

Cho et al., 2010 [32]
TiO₂ (30–40)
Intratracheal instillation: 50 and 150 cm²/rat
5 female Wistar rats per group
Inflammatory action in BAL and histology of the lung: no effect.

Leppanen et al., 2011 [76]
Anatase + Brookite TiO₂ (20 nm)
Inhalation: 8–30 mg/m³ for 0.5 hr (acute exposure); 30 mg/m³ for 1 hr a day, 4 days a wk for 4 wks (sub-chronic exposure)
4–6 male Crl:OF1 mice per group
Airflow limitation effect: reduction in expiratory flow in all the exposure situations. Inflammatory action: no effect

Morimoto et al., 2011 [46]
Rutile TiO₂ (35)
Inhalation: /cm³ 6 hr a day for 4 wks.
30 male Wistar rats per group
Inflammatory action: no effect.

Hougaard et al., 2010 [77]
Rutile UV-titan L181, modified with Zr, Si, Al and coated with polyalcohols ()
Inhalation: TiO₂ mg/m³ for 1 hr a day, for 11 gestational consecutive days.
Female time-mated C57BL/6BomTac mice
Inflammatory action: increased NEUs, and LYMs, decreased AMs in BAL.

Halappanavar et al., 2011 [78]
See Hougaard et al., 2010 [77]
Inflammatory action: TiO₂ increased mRNA for Saa1, Saa3, several C-X-C and C-C motif chemokines, TNF-α.

Nemmar et al., 2011 [79]
Rutile Fe-doped nanorod TiO₂ (length: 80; diameter: 7)
Intratracheal instillation: 1,5 mg/kg TiO₂
4 male Wistar rats per group
Inflammatory action: NEUs, IL-6 increased, SOD activity decreased in BAL. Histology: inflammatory cell infiltration.

Hussain et al., 2011 [80]
Anatase TiO₂ (15)
Oropharyngeal aspiration: ~0.8 mg/kg TiO₂
5-6 male BALB/c mice
Airway reactivity: increased by TiO₂ in TDI sensitized mice Inflammatory action: TiO₂ increased NEUs and AMs in BAL of TDI sensitized mice.

Gustafsson et al., 2011 [48]
P25 Degussa TiO₂
Intratracheal instillation: 1, 5, and 7.5 mg/kg TiO₂
5–20 male Dark Agouti rats per group
Inflammatory action: transient increase in EOSs and NEUs in BAL, followed by a recruitment of DCs and NKs. Elevated levels of IL-1, IL-2, IL-6, CINC-1, and GM-CSF.

ACP, acid phosphatase; ALB, albumin; ALP, alkaline phosphatase; AM, alveolar macrophage; BAL, bronchoalveolar lavage; BDNF, brain-derived neurotrophic factor; CINC-1, cytokine induced neutrophil chemoattractant-1; CXCL-1, chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 1; DC, dendritic cell; NK, natural killer; EOS, eosinophil; GGT, γ-glutamyl transpeptidase; GM-CSF, granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor; Ig, immunoglobulin; IL-, interleukin; IFN-γ, interferon-γ; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; LPO, lipid peroxidation; LPS, lipopolysaccharide; LYM, lymphocyte; MIP-2, macrophage-inflammatory protein-2; NAG, N-acetyl-glucosaminidase; NEU, neutrophil; NGF, nerve growth factor; PAS, Periodic Acid-Schiff; PMN, polymorphonuclear; PNE, pneumocyte; Saa, serum amyloid A-; SOD, superoxide dismutase; TiO₂ NPs, titanium dioxide nanoparticles; TCC, total cell count; TDI, toluene diisocyanate; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α; TPC, total protein content.

2.1.1. Inflammatory Responses

TiO₂ FormRegarding the TiO₂ form, different studies have demonstrated the pulmonary toxicity of acute exposure to anatase in terms of increased bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) inflammatory parameters [35–38], lung tissue structural damage, and inflammatory infiltration [22, 35, 36, 39, 40] although it is modest in both acute and subacute exposure [41]. However, as assessed by Liu et al. [36], only a slight increase in toxicity from anatase exposure was evident relative to rutile and P25 Degussa TiO₂ NP treatments.Only four studies have evaluated the ability of rutile TiO₂ to induce toxic effects on lung tissues, reporting conflicting results following acute [42–45] or subchronic exposure [46]. While the first two studies demonstrated an increase of inflammatory cells in BAL [43], alterations in gene expression [42], and pathological changes in lung tissue [42, 43], the latter two failed to reveal such changes [44–46].When comparing the lung toxicity induced by rutile NPs with that caused by P25 Degussa NPs, the former were not able to induce alterations of the lung parameters examined suggesting greater toxic effects of the mixture compared to rutile alone [44, 45]. Regarding the toxic effects of P25 Degussa NPs on the lung, other studies have reported that these particles are able to induce increased inflammatory parameters in the BAL of acutely exposed animals [47, 48], though some interspecies differences in inflammatory responses were evident in animals subchronically treated [49]. The species differences detected between hamsters, rats, and mice may reflect the capacity of some animals to rapidly clear particles from the lung, as previously demonstrated in the same species subchronically exposed to pigmentary fine TiO₂ particles [50, 51]. Interestingly, Gustafsson et al. [48] demonstrated a dynamic inflammatory response to P25 Degussa NPs characterized by a transient innate immune activation followed by a late-phase, long-lasting recruitment of lymphocytes involved in adaptive immunity.Other mixtures of anatase and rutile particles were also able to induce increases in BAL fluid inflammatory parameters and lung histopathological alterations in rats subacutely exposed by inhalation [66, 67], while mixtures of anatase and brookite (3 : 1) failed to induce such effects in mice after acute, subacute, or subchronic inhalations [70, 76].Other studies report similar changes after acute or subacute exposure, such as increased levels of inflammatory mediators in BAL [58, 59, 62, 73], enhanced reactive oxygen species (ROS) production [59] and pathological alterations at the histopathology examination of the lung [57, 73, 75] but lack details regarding the TiO₂ form. Interestingly, Baggs et al. [57] demonstrated that chronic exposure to TiO₂ NPs induces lesions that are able to regress during a 1-year period following cessation of exposure. Surprisingly, Cho et al. [32], investigating the acute effects of intratracheal instillations of TiO₂ NPs, failed to demonstrate any alteration among BAL inflammatory parameters and histological lung characteristics. Finally, Liu et al. [74] demonstrated that intratracheal instillation of not characterized TiO₂ NPs damaged alveolar macrophage (AM) phagocytic and chemotactic ability.

SizeSeveral studies described greater inflammatory effects of NPs compared to their fine counterparts both after acute [38, 53, 54, 62] and chronic exposure [53, 55].In line with these results on NP size-related effects, a more recent intratracheal instillation study [38] pointed out that the smaller particles lead to greater inflammation in short-term observations. In contrast, no clear relationship was found between pulmonary inflammation and treatments with different agglomeration states of the same primary TiO₂ NPs.

ShapeThe critical role of shape in TiO₂ NP bioactivity is supported by the increased markers of inflammation detected in BAL of anatase nanobelt aspiration-treated mice compared with those determined in animals treated with TiO₂ nanospheres [37].

Surface AreaHigh mass or volume dose of poorly soluble, low-toxicity (PSLT) fine particles in the lungs has been associated with overloading, while ultrafine particles impair lung clearance at lower mass or volume doses [15]. The increased lung retention and inflammatory response of nanosized PSLT particles compared to fine PSLT particles correlate better to the particle surface area dose [81, 82]. Indeed, the larger inflammatory response after TiO₂ NP treatment compared to larger particles may be ascribed to an increase in NP surface area. This conclusion has been questioned, and conflicting results are present in literature on this topic. Some studies support the hypothesis that surface area may be the more appropriate dose metric for TiO₂ NP pulmonary toxicity studies [12, 60, 61]. When the same mass doses were acutely introduced into rats and mice via intratracheal instillation, TiO₂ NPs induced a much greater pulmonary-inflammatory response than fine TiO₂ particles [12, 60]. However, when the doses were normalized to the particle-administered surface area, the response in the lung for both nanosized and fine TiO₂ particles showed the same dose-response curve. Thus, in pulmonary toxicity studies, surface area, for particles of different sizes but of the same chemistry, proved to be a better dosemetric parameter than particle mass or number.However, other studies are in conflict with the notion that the inflammatory response is expected to be more severe with higher surface area NPs [39, 44, 45]. In fact, similar BAL cell count alterations were reported in rats after intratracheal administrations of the same dose of fine rutile TiO₂ particles, nanosized TiO₂ anatase rods and dots, although the latter had a >6-fold increase in surface area compared with the nanorods [39]. In a subsequent study, the same authors [44, 45] confirmed the previous evaluations and concluded that having a larger surface area does not necessarily indicate that NPs will produce greater pulmonary inflammation and cytotoxicity compared to larger particles of a similar composition. In line with the Warheit et al. [39, 44, 45] results, 2- to 5-nm anatase NPs (i.e., with the highest surface area and smallest particle size) were not particularly toxic in the Grassian et al. [41] subacute inhalation study. Furthermore, in Li et al. [35], 3-nm anatase NPs did not elicit more pulmonary toxicity compared to 20-nm NPs, irrespective of their smaller size and greater surface area.However, an aspect to take in consideration for a correct interpretation of these data is the potential influence of “lung overload” [13]. In the last decade, it has become clear that a breakdown in normal AM-mediated clearance of particles is seen in overload [83]. This is thought to be a consequence of volumetric overload of the AM [84, 85] or a response to the greater particle surface area per mass dose, as in the case of NPs, which is associated with decreased AM clearance and inflammation [13, 86]. In this regard, the importance of the NP surface area overlaps with the role of the dose administered to rats. Most of the studies herein described showed greater TiO₂ NP effects at higher exposure doses [35, 36, 39, 40, 43–45, 48, 49, 61, 62, 65, 67, 79]. Unfortunately, the large dose range applied in these studies does not allow one to establish a direct relationship between the different treatments and pulmonary effects. Moreover, when a study employes unrealistically high doses of NPs, such as in the case of Chen et al. [22], its relevance is dubious at best. In this light, when analyzing the NP dose role in lung damage, caution should be applied in extrapolating data for human evaluations.

ChemistryWarheit et al. [44, 45] found that only non-coated particles resulted in BAL alteration and lung histopathological changes compared to their coated counterparts, suggesting a possible influencing role of surface chemistry in nano-TiO₂-induced lung toxicity. In this regard, several studies have investigated the influence of particle chemical surface properties, surface coatings, and functionalization on pulmonary responses showing conflicting results [61, 70, 77, 78].Methylated-hydrophobic TiO₂ NPs acutely decreased the percentage of PMN and the protein concentration in BAL of intratracheally administered rats [61], a result in line with those of Oberdörster [87], but in contrast with those of Pott et al. [88] showing that hydrophobic, silanized TiO₂ NPs induced acute mortality in intratracheally exposed rats. Other studies reported significant inflammatory reactions after acute [70, 79] and subacute [70, 77, 78] exposure to coated NPs, particularly silica-coated rutile TiO₂ NPs [70], rutile TiO₂ NPs surface modified with unspecified amount of zirconium, silicon, aluminum, and coated with polyalcohols [77, 78] and rutile Fe-doped TiO₂ NPs [79]. However, at present, it is unclear what changes lead to differences in the toxicity induced by surface modified TiO₂ NPs. In additional experiments, P25 Degussa TiO₂ NPs caused more persistent pulmonary toxicity than carbon black NPs when compared on an equivalent particle surface area basis [68].On the other hand, several studies investigated the TiO₂ NP role as an adjuvant in promoting allergic sensitization or in influencing allergic lung inflammation. In this regard, the results obtained by Larsen et al. [65] and Park et al. [69] supported the adjuvant effect of not characterized and P25 Degussa TiO₂ NPs, respectively, through the promotion of a T-helper (Th)-2 immune response assessed by increased levels of interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, and IL-10 in BAL. These alterations could stimulate allergic reactions, though the underlying mechanisms are not fully understood. Interestingly, in two-day- and two-week-old rats, but not in adult animals, subacute inhalation of P25 Degussa TiO₂ NPs produced upregulation of lung neurotrophins which was associated with a greater airway hyperresponsiveness [72]. The age-dependent response to TiO₂ NPs suggests that the risk of developing asthma after NP exposure is higher in the earlier stages of lung development. Hussain et al. [80] demonstrated that intrapulmonary doses of TiO₂ NPs can aggravate pulmonary inflammation and airway hyperreactivity in a mouse model of diisocyanate-induced asthma. Moreover, mixture of anatase and brookite TiO₂ NPs caused airflow limitation in both acute and repeated 4-week-inhalation exposures [76]. In contrasts to these results [65, 69, 72, 76, 80], a recent study [71] demonstrated the role of silica-coated rutile TiO₂ NPs as inhibitors of most soluble and cellular mediators of allergic asthma. In fact, in ovalbumin-sensitized mice, the number of inflammatory cells, and the airway hyperreactivity were dramatically reduced after exposure to TiO₂ NPs. The conflicting results of the previous studies could be ascribed to the different health status of the animals, the different type of particle employed, or the different route of exposure. Rossi et al. [71] hypothesized that anti-inflammatory Th-2 response caused by allergen sensitization may be suppressed by the competing proinflammatory response elicited by TiO₂ exposure. However, future studies are needed to deeply clarify the TiO₂ NP role in allergic reactions and the molecular mechanisms involved.

2.1.2. Lung Distribution

Particle size was able to affect the fate of NPs, particularly lung accumulation and distribution in lung compartments, after pulmonary exposure. In fact, several studies described greater NP lung amounts compared to their fine counterparts [12, 52–55, 60]. Ferin et al. [53] suggested that TiO₂ particle passage in the interstitium could be promoted by the smaller sizes of the particles and the higher concentrations. Though data regarding the accumulation of NPs in the interstitium are too limited to allow a comprehensive evaluation of its consequences, this aspect is of particular interest considering that particle retention in the lung may give rise to potential enhancement of local effects and the increased possibility of systemic redistribution.

Translocation of NPs from pulmonary airways into other pulmonary compartments, such as epithelium/endothelium, connective tissue, the capillary lumen, or into systemic circulation, is the subject of controversial discussion in the literature. Two studies of the same group demonstrated conflicting results in that regard [63, 64]. The first showed that NP distribution was only related to the volume fractions of the corresponding compartments [63], while the second detected a correlation with the time points considered [64]. In fact, it found that NPs were preferentially located in the connective tissue and in the capillary lumen at 1 and 24 h after exposure, respectively. The epithelium and the connective tissues were not deposition sites but only passageways for NPs to reach the capillary circulation. However, whether NPs can translocate from air-filled spaces to the systemic circulation is still not fully understood, and further investigation is needed.

2.1.3. Carcinogenic Effects

Animal and human epidemiological data have led TiO₂ to be designated as “possibly carcinogenic” to humans [28, 29, 89]. Surprisingly, however, few studies have investigated the carcinogenicity of TiO₂ NPs, and only recently, NIOSH concluded that inhaled ultrafine TiO₂ is a potential occupational carcinogen [15]. The most relevant data for assessing the health risk for workers are results from a chronic animal inhalation study performed by Heinrich et al. [56], in which rats exposed by inhalation to P25 Degussa TiO₂ NPs showed increased rates of adenocarcinomas compared to controls. Interestingly, in this study, mice exposed to the same NPs, according to the same methodology, did not show differences in tumor rates compared to controls. Aside from demonstrating that TiO₂ NPs can induce lung cancer in exposed animals, an interesting finding of this work is the difference in carcinogenicity between rats and mice. The species difference in response to insoluble and low toxicity dust, and the controversial approach to classify such a dust as a potential human carcinogen is subject to debate. Moreover, NIOSH has concluded that TiO₂ is not a direct-acting carcinogen, but acts through a secondary genotoxic mechanism primarily related to particle size and surface area [15], as supported by the comprehensive analysis of the data reported by Heinrich et al. [56] and those obtained by Lee et al. with fine-sized TiO₂ [90]. However, considering the pressing concern regarding cancerogenic effects of TiO₂ NP exposure on general and occupational populations and the limited number of in vivo studies on this topic, additional researches seem highly necessary.

2.2. Nervous System

Regarding TiO₂ NP neurotoxicity, different studies have demonstrated the ability of these NPs to translocate into the brain, irrespective of the route of exposure [31, 73, 91–94], the form of the TiO₂, and the size of the NPs and to accumulate in this organ [31, 91–93] inducing numerical and structural changes in the neuronal architecture [31, 92, 93] (Table 2).

Table 2: In vivo studies that investigated the adverse effects of TiO₂ NPs on nervous system.

Nervous system

References
Crystal phase composition (particle size in nm)
Type of exposure
Type and number of animals
Results

Wang et al., 2007 [91]
TiO₂ (25, 80, 155)
Intranasal instillation: 50 mg/kg TiO₂ BW every other day for 20 days.
Female CD mice
Ti brain content: increased. Neurotransmitters: NE and 5-HT increased; DA, DOPAC, HVA, and 5-HIAA decreased.

Wang et al., 2008 [31]
Rutile TiO₂ (80) Anatase TiO₂ (155)
Intranasal instillation: 500 μg TiO₂ every other day for 15 times.
15 female CD-1(ICR) mice
Ti brain distribution: mainly in olfactory bulb and hippocampus. Oxidative stress: CAT, MDA, Pr. Carb. increased, SOD decreased. Neurotransmitters: AchE, Glu and NO increased.

Wang et al., 2008 [92]
See Wang et al., 2008 [31]
Intranasal instillation: 500 μg TiO₂ every other day for 15 times.
10 female CD-1(ICR) mice
Ti brain distribution: mainly in hippocampus. Oxidative stress: GSH-Px, GST, SOD, GSH, and MDA increased. Histology: irregular neuronal arrangement, condensated chromatin. Inflammatory action: increased TNF-α and IL-1β levels.

Shimizu et al., 2009 [102]
Anatase TiO₂ (25–70)
Subcutaneous injections: 100 μL of TiO₂ at 1 μg/μL on gestational days 6, 9, 12, and 15.
15 pregnant ICR mice, 21 male fetuses and pups
Gene expression: up-regulated cell death, apoptosis, brain development, oxidative stress, apoptosis, neurotransmitter genes.

Takeda et al., 2009 [101]
Anatase TiO₂ (25–70)
Subcutaneous injections: 100 μL of TiO₂ at 1 mg/mL at 3, 7, 10 and 14 days post-coitum.
6 pregnant Slc:ICR mice per group
offspring brain distribution: cortex and olfactory bulb. Apoptosis: presence of markers and features in olfactory cells.

Takahashi et al., 2010 [103]
Anatase TiO₂ (25–70)
Subcutaneous injections: 100 μL of TiO₂ at 1 mg/mL at gestational days 6, 9, 12, 15, 18.
Pregnant Slc:ICR mice per group
Monoamine levels: DA, DOPAc, HVA, 3-MT increased in the prefrontal cortex and neostriatum.

Ma et al., 2010 [93]
Anatase TiO₂ (5) Bulk TiO₂ (10–15 nm.)
Intra-abdominal injections: 5–150 mg/kg nano-TiO₂ and 150 mg/kg bulk TiO₂ every day for 14 days, respectively.
10 female CD-1(ICR) mice per group
Ti brain content: higher increase with nano TiO₂. Oxidative stress: , H₂O₂, MDA, NOS, iNOS, NO increased; antioxidative enzymes, GLU, AchE decreased. Histology: filamentous-shaped neurons and inflammatory cells.

Shin et al., 2010 [99]
Rutile TiO₂ (1 μm) P25 TiO₂ (21)
Intraperitoneal injections: 40 mg/kg TiO₂ 30 min after vehicle or 5 mg/kg LPS.
3–6 male C57BL/6 mice per group
Inflammatory action: after LPS, TiO₂ NPs increased IL-1β, TNF-α and iNOS and induced microglial activation. Oxidative stress: after LPS TiO₂ NPs enhanced ROS.

Hu et al., 2010 [94]
Anatase TiO₂ (5)
Intragastric administration: 5–50 mg/kg TiO₂ suspension every day for 60 days.
20 female mice per group
Neurotransmitters: ACh, Glu, and NO increased; NE, DA, DOPAC,5-HT, and 5-HIAA decreased. Enzyme activity: decreased Na⁺/K⁺, Ca²⁺, Ca²⁺/Mg²⁺ ATPase; promoted AchE, and iNOS.

Li et al., 2010 [73]
Anatase TiO₂ (3)
Intratracheal instillation: 3.3 mg/kg TiO₂ once a wk for 4 wks.
13 male Kunming mice per group
Ti brain content: increased Oxidative stress: , OH⁻, H₂O₂, MDA increased in brain. Histology: exudates, inflammatory infiltration and necrosis.

Yamashita et al., 2011 [100]
TiO₂ (35)
Intravenous injection: 0.8 mg TiO₂ for 2 consecutive gestational days.
Pregnant mice
Ti distribution: TiO₂ detected in fetal brain

Jeon et al., 2011 [95]
TiO₂
N.A
N.A.
Proteomic analysis: altered protein expression. Oxidative stress: antioxidant and AchE activities reduced.

5-HIAA, 5-hydroxyindole acetic acid; 5-HT, 5-hydroxytryptamine; 3-MT, 3.methoxytyramine-hydroclhoride; Ach, acetylcholine; AchE, acetylcholinesterase; CAT catalase activity; NE, norepinephrine; DA, dopamine; DOPAC, 3, 4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid; Glu, glutamic acid; GSH, reduced glutathione; GSH-Px, glutathione peroxidase; GST, glutathione-S-transferase; HVA, homovanillic acid; IL-, interleukin; iNOS, inducible nitric oxide synthase; LPS, lipopolysaccharide; MDA, malondialdehyde; NE, norepinephrine; NO, nitric oxide; NOS, nitric oxide synthase; Pr.Carb., Protein carbonyls; ROS, reactive oxygen species; SOD, superoxide dismutase; TiO₂ NPs, titanium dioxide nanoparticles; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α.

Several studies have unequivocally showed that rutile TiO₂ NPs, taken up by intranasal exposure, could be translocated into the central nervous system (CNS) via the olfactory pathway in mice and accumulate in the entire brain, mainly in the hippocampus regions [31, 91, 92]. However, to verify the generalization of this phenomenon, further studies are needed in other animal species. Regardless, this neuronal translocation pathway should be taken into account for health risk assessments of TiO₂ NPs. In particular, it could be useful to avoid possible toxic effects to the general population but principally to subjects that work with these NPs. Brain accumulation was also demonstrated in mice intratracheally instilled with no characterized TiO₂ NPs able to penetrate alveolar-capillary barrier, enter blood circulation, and further penetrate blood-brain barrier inducing tissue damage [73].

The deposition of TiO₂ NPs in brain was reported to induce changes in the release and metabolism of neurotransmitters, although with the same conflicting results, maybe due to the different route of exposure [31, 91, 93, 94]. Particularly, the levels of norepinephrine (NE) and 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) increased after intranasal exposure [91] while decreased in response to intragastric administrations of anatase TiO₂ NPs [93]. Dopamine (DA), 3,4-dihydroxyphenylacetic acid (DOPAC), homovanillic (HVA), and 5-hydroxyindole acetic acid (5-HIAA) contents were reduced by both types of treatment [91, 94]. Moreover, intranasal instillation of rutile [31] and intragastric administrations of anatase TiO₂ NPs [94] increased catalase and acetylcholinesterase (AchE) activity, soluble protein carbonyl, acetylcholine (Ach), glutamic acid (Glu), and NO content. Intraperitoneally injected anatase TiO₂ NPs increased NO, while decreased Glu content and AchE activity [92]. Interestingly, the study performed by Hu et al. [94] demonstrated also that the contents of Ca, Mg, Na, K, Fe, and Zn in brain were significantly altered after TiO₂ NP exposure. The disturbed homeostasis of trace elements, neurotransmitters, and enzymes in brain may be responsible of the spatial recognition memory impairments reported in treated mice [94]. However, as assessed by a proteomic analysis, proteins of the mouse brain resulted differentially expressed in response to TiO₂ NP treatment even if NPs were not detected in the tissue [95].

As observed in vitro [96–98], oxidative stress-related damage with a consequent alteration in the balance between oxidative and antioxidative activities was also reported in in vivo studies [31, 73, 92, 93, 95]. Malondiadehyde (MDA) levels increased after intranasal instillations [31, 92], intraabdominal injections [93], and intratracheal instillation in mice [73]. Similarly, Li et al. [73], and Ma et al. [93] demonstrated that the level of superoxide anion (), peroxide (H₂O₂) [73, 93] and hydroxyl radicals [73] increased in treated animals. TiO₂ NPs are able also to induce an inflammatory effect in brain of treated mice, as detected by the increased cytokine release [92, 99]. In the latter study, rutile and P25 Degussa TiO₂ NPs intraperitoneally injected in mice after lipopolysaccharide (LPS) increased the mRNA levels of IL-1β and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α and also those of IL-1β protein. Interestingly, LPS induction was necessary to cause this phenomenon, suggesting the importance of a trigger element or of a possible synergistic effect in tissue responses to TiO₂ NPs.

Finally, several studies demonstrated the embryotoxic role of maternal intravenous injection of no characterized TiO₂ NPs [100], or subcutaneous injections of anatase TiO₂ NPs [101–103]. Following this latter treatment, TiO₂ accumulation was detected in the offspring cerebral cortex and olfactory bulb and numerous olfactory bulb cells resulted positive to markers of apoptosis [101]. Moreover, the same prenatal exposure induced an altered expression of genes involved in brain development, cell death, and the response to oxidative stress in the newborn pups [102]. Finally, the influence of prenatal TiO₂ NP exposure on the dopaminergic system was demonstrated by the increased DA, DOPAC, HVA and 3-methoxytyramina hydrochloride levels in the prefrontal cortex and in the neostriatum of exposed mice [103].

These data confirm that TiO₂ NPs can be transferred from mothers to the fetal brain, inducing toxic effects on fetal brain development carrying a series of nervous system disorders. In this context, a deep knowledge regarding the influence of TiO₂ NPs on neuronal cells is becoming urgent. Though additional studies are necessary to support these findings, they should be taken in consideration for the correct risk assessment of TiO₂ NP exposure, particularly during a complex biological status like pregnancy and the early stage of life.

2.3. Dermal and Mucosal System

Studies regarding the effects of TiO₂ NPs on the dermal system (in particular, the percutaneous absorption of NPs) show more homogeneous findings, demonstrating a clear absence of penetration through the intact epidermal barrier when TiO₂ NP formulations are applied on different animal [104, 105] and human [106–110] skins (Table 3). Considering the widespread use of TiO₂ NPs in cosmetic sunscreens (due to their broad-spectrum UV absorption and high esthetical acceptance) [107], this is an important finding.

Table 3: In vivo studies that investigated the adverse effects of TiO₂ NPs on dermal system.

Dermal and mucosal system

References
Crystal phase composition (particle size in nm)
Type of exposure
Type and number of animals/subjects
Results

Tan et al., 1996 [112]
Sunscreen containing 8% microfine TiO₂
Cutaneous application: 2 times/day for 2–6 wks.
13 male and female volunteer patients
TiO₂ absorption: levels of Ti in dermis were higher in treated patients compared to controls, but not significantly.

Lademann et al., 1999 [113]
W/O emulsion UV-Titan M 160
Cutaneous application: 2 mg/cm² on the volar forearm, 5 times on the first 3 days, and once on the 4th.
Human volunteers
TiO₂ absorption: mostly located in the upper st. corneum.

Pflücker et al., 2001 [107]
W/O emulsion T805 coated with trimethyl octylsilane TiO₂ (20) W/O emulsion Eusolex T-2000 TiO₂ coated with Al₂O₃ and SiO₂ (10–15) W/O emulsion Tioveil AQ TiO₂ coated with Al and SiO₂ (100)
Cutaneous application: 4 mg/cm² on forearm skin for 6 hr.
Human volunteer
TiO₂ absorption: TiO₂ solely localized on the outermost surface of the st. corneum, not in the deeper subcutaneous layers.

Schulz et al., 2002 [108]

See Pflücker et al., 2001 [107]

TiO₂ absorption: located on the outermost surface of the st. corneum and not in the deeper subcutaneous layers.

Menzel et al., 2004 [105]
Sunscreen containing TiO₂ (length: 45–150; width: 17–35)
Cutaneous application: on the back pig skin for 8–48 hr.
Pigs
TiO₂ absorption: TiO₂ penetrated through intercellular spaces of the st. corneum into the st. granulosum.

Kertész et al., 2005 [106]
Hydrophobic emulsion TiO₂ NPs.
Cutaneous application: on human foreskin grafts for 1–48 hr.
Human grafts transplanted into SCID mice
TiO₂ absorption: corneocyte layers of the st. corneum.

Mavon et al., 2007 [109]
Emulsion with 3% T805 Degussa TiO₂ coated with trimethyl octylsilane (20)
Cutaneous application: 2 mg/cm² on upper arms.
3 human volunteers
TiO₂ absorption: 93% of the TiO₂ applied was recovered in the st. corneum.

Kiss et al., 2008 [110]
Hydrophobic emulsion containing micronized TiO₂.
Cutaneous application: 2 mg/cm² on human foreskin grafts for 24 hr.
Human grafts transplanted into SCID mice
TiO ₂ absorption: outermost layers of the st. corneum.

Yanagisawa et al., 2009 [114]
Rutile TiO₂ (15, 50, 100)
Intradermal injections: of 20 μg TiO₂ with or without mite allergen on the ears.
11 male C/NgaTndCrj (NC/Nga) mice per group
Atopic dermatitis: allergen + TiO₂ enhanced ear thickening. Inflammatory action: allergen + TiO₂ increased EOSs, IL-4, MCs and decreased IFN-γ; TiO₂ increased IL-13.

Wu et al., 2009 [115]
Anatase TiO₂ (, ) Rutile TiO₂ (, ) P25 Degussa TiO₂ (~21) TiO₂ (0.3–0.5 μm)
Cutaneous application: 24 mg TiO₂ formulations on the pig ear for 30 days and on the mouse interscapular skin for 60 consecutive days.
3 male reared pigs per group 6 hairless mice (BALB/c/nu/nu) per group
TiO₂ absorption in pigs: TiO₂ detected in the st. corneum, granulosum, prickle and basal cell layer, not in the dermis; TiO₂ absorption in mice: increased MDA, reduced HYP content, and excessive keratinisation in skin.

Sadrieh et al., 2010 [104]
P25 Degussa TiO₂ (30–50) Rutile TiO₂ coated with aluminium hydroxide/dimethicone copolymer (diameter: 20–30, length: 50–150) Submicron TiO₂ (300–500)
Cutaneous application: 2 mg cream/cm² skin for 4 times/day, 5 days/week, 4 weeks of.
3 female Yucatan minipigs per group
TiO₂ absorption: TiO₂ detected in the upper st. corneum and follicular lumen, with few particles observed in dermal layers as a contamination results.

Adachi et al., 2010 [111]
W/O emulsion containing anatase TiO₂ ()
Cutaneous application: 4 mg/cm² TiO₂ on dorsal skin.
Male hairless Wistar Yagi rats
TiO₂ absorption: TiO₂ detected in the horny layer of the interfollicular epidermis.

Moon et al., 2011 [116]
TiO₂ (<25; <100)
Intraperitoneal injections: once a day for 28 consecutive days before subcutaneous implantation with B16F10 melanoma cells.
Mice
Tumor growth: increased

Furukawa et al., 2011 [117]
Coated TiO₂ (long axis: 50–100; short axis: 10–20)
Cutaneous application: 5–20 mg TiO₂ in the postinitiation phase in a skin carcinogenesis model.
10–20 CD1 (ICR) female mice per group
Carcinogenicity: no increased development of skin nodules

EOS, eosinophil; HYP, hydroxyproline; IL-, interleukin; IFN-γ, interferon- γ; MC, mast cell; MDA, malondialdehyde; TiO₂ NPs, titanium dioxide nanoparticles.

Sadrieh et al. [104] analyzed the correlation between different forms of TiO₂ and percutaneous absorption in micropig skin, demonstrating that irrespective of the form, after a subchronic exposure, NPs were found in the stratum corneum but not in the deeper epidermal strata. Anatase TiO₂ NPs subacutely exposed to hairless rat skin were only detected in the horny layer of the interfollicular epidermis, without penetration into viable cell layers or induction of any cellular changes [111].

Neither the shape [104, 105, 107, 108] nor the surface chemistry [107–109] seems to influence NP penetration after acute and subacute exposure.

Pflücker et al. [107] demonstrated that all TiO₂ NP types applied on skin areas of human forearm were only detected on the outermost layer of the stratum corneum, irrespective of their surface chemistry, NP size, and shape. The same results were confirmed by Schulz et al. [108]. Similarly, after application of lanceolate TiO₂ NPs on the backs of pigs, high concentrations of Ti were found in the stratum corneum and granulosum, but not into the stratum spinosum [105].

Mavon et al. [109] demonstrated that 93% of the TiO₂ T805 NPs hydrophobically coated with trimethyloctylsilane applied on human upper arms were found in the stratum corneum, decreasing continuously with depth. No TiO₂ penetration into viable skin layers was assessed confirming the in vitro findings of the study.

The studies investigating the Ti penetration and distribution in biopsies obtained from human skin grafts transplanted into severe combined immune deficiency (SCID) mice could only detect Ti in the outermost layers of the stratum corneum of the skin biopsies, irrespective of the various NP formulation applied and the time points considered (1–48 h) [106, 110].

As also confirmed by Menzel et al. [105], Lademann et al. [113] failed to demonstrate a role for hair follicles as a percutaneous absorption pathway. In fact, Ti was detected in the stratum corneum and in the follicle channels but not in the interfollicular space under the stratum corneum or into the viable layers of the forearm skin of human volunteers.

Only a few reports detail Ti penetration into human dermis [112, 115]. For instance, in a pilot study conducted in 1996, Tan et al. [112] demonstrated percutaneous penetration of Ti in patients subchronically applied sunscreen containing microfine TiO₂. Although Ti levels in the dermis of exposed subjects were higher than controls, these results were not statistically significant and were not confirmed by subsequent studies. Moreover, Wu et al. [115] reported the ability of TiO₂ NPs in different form, anatase, rutile, P25 Degussa, and different sizes to penetrate through the skin, reaching different tissues (e.g., liver, spleen, and heart) where pathological lesions were induced after subchronic dermal exposure of hairless mice. Moreover, increased MDA levels were determined in the skin, which also showed excessive keratinization, thinner dermis and wrinkled epidermidis. These data could not be confirmed when reared pigs were treated with two types of the previously employed NPs for shorter periods of time.

The same interesting points of discussion emerged from this latter study. It seems that the penetrative ability of similar TiO₂ NPs into the cutaneous layers depends on the animal species studied and on the period of exposure. Furthermore, pathological skin lesions due to NP application are likely ascribed to oxidative stress, which was also detected on human and murine dermal fibroblasts in vitro [118–120].

Intradermal injection of TiO₂ NPs aggravated atopic dermatitis (AD) symptoms related to mite allergen in mice assumed to show skin barrier dysfunction/defect through Th-2 immune inflammatory responses and histamine release [114]. These data support the importance of an intact dermal defense system to prevent uptake of TiO₂ NPs, which can lead to skin damage, activation of the immune system, and eventually a decrease in the allergy threshold [105].

Ultimately, the importance of the human studies on percutaneous TiO₂ absorption is underlined by the fact that these experiments alone are able to provide a relevant approach to direct human risk assessment and are the first step in the complex process of generalizing implications regarding environmental or occupational health.

Regarding skin carcinogenicity, conflicting results were reported [116, 117]. Tumor growth was increased when mice were intraperitoneally injected with TiO₂ NPs prior to the subcutaneous implantation of B16F10 melanoma cells [116]. The authors suggest that TiO₂ NPs might have the potential to enhance tumor growth in situ through immunomodulation of B- and T-lymphocytes, macrophages, and NK cells as supported also by results obtained in the spleen tissue. In contrast to these findings, Furukawa et al. [117] investigated the safety of coated and uncoated TiO₂ NPs in a mouse medium-term skin carcinogenesis bioassay. Both TiO₂ NPs applied to mouse skin in the postinhitiation phase did not increase the development of skin nodules histopathologically diagnosed as squamous cell hyperplasia, sebaceous gland hyperplasia, squamous cell papilloma, and keratoacanthoma. According to these data, TiO₂ NPs do not possess postinhitiation potential and there is no carcinogenic risk relevant to percutaneous application of TiO₂ NP preparations.

2.4. Cardiovascular System

Due to the complexity of the cardiovascular system, studies regarding the potential effects of TiO₂ NPs on this system have focused on different functional aspects, such as cardiotoxicity [121, 122], cardiovascular parameters, such as systolic blood pressure (SBP) and heart rate (HR) variability [79], induction of thrombosis [22, 123], and the alteration of vasomotor responses [124–128] (Table 4).

Table 4: In vivo studies that investigated the adverse effects of TiO₂ NPs on cardiovascular system.

Cardiovascular system

References
Crystal phase composition (particle size in nm)
Type of exposure
Type and number of animals
Results

Wang et al., 2007 [121]
TiO₂ (25, 80, 155)
Intragastric administration: 5 g/kg TiO₂ in a minute.
20 male and female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Biochemical parameters: 80 and 25 nm TiO₂ increased LDH and alpha-HBDH compared to controls and fine group.

Chen et al., 2009 [22]
Anatase TiO₂ (80–110)
Intraperitoneal injections: 32–2592 mg/kg TiO₂.
10 male and female ICR mice per group
Vascular system: pulmonary thrombosis

Liu et al., 2009 [122]
Anatase TiO₂ (5) Bulk rutile TiO₂ (10–15 μm)
Intra-abdominal injections: 5–150 mg/kg BW anatase TiO₂ and 150 mg/kg bulk TiO₂ everyday for 14 days.
10 female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Biochemical parameters: CK, LDH, AST, and alpha-HBDH were increased by both TiO₂.

Bu et al., 2010 [129]
Rutile-anatase TiO₂ mixture (<50)
Intragastric administration: 0.16–1 g/kg TiO₂ once a day for 14 consecutive days.
16 male and female Wistar rats per group
Biochemical parameters: increased CK and LDH.

Bihari et al., 2010 [123]
Rutile TiO₂ (~)
Intravenous administration: 1 mg/kg TiO₂ 10 min before thrombosis induction.
8 male C57BL/6Ncrl mice
Mesenteric and cremasteric thrombosis: not determined.

Nurkiewicz et al., 2008 [124]
P25 anatase-rutile TiO₂ (21) TiO₂ (1 μm)
Inhalation: 1.5–20 mg/m³ TiO₂ for 120–720 min.
7–12 male Sprague Dawley rats per group
Spinotrapezious arteriolar endothelium dilation: impaired by both TiO₂.

Nurkiewicz et al., 2009 [125]
P25 anatase-rutile TiO₂ (21) Rutile TiO₂ (1 μm)
Inhalation: 1.5–16 mg/m³ TiO₂ for 240–720 min.
8–16 male Sprague Dawley rats per group
Spinotrapezious arteriolar endothelium dilation: impaired by both TiO₂.

LeBlanc et al., 2009 [126]
P25 anatase-rutile TiO₂ (21)
Inhalation: 6 mg/m³ TiO₂ for 240 min.
26 male Sprague Dawley rats
Coronary arteriolar endothelium: TiO₂ increased spontaneous arteriolar tone and impaired flow and vasodilator induced dilation.

LeBlanc et al., 2010 [127]
P25 anatase-rutile TiO₂ (21)
Inhalation: 6 mg/m³ TiO₂ for 240 min.
50 male Sprague Dawley rats
Coronary arteriolar endothelium dilation: impaired by TiO₂. Oxidative stress: ROS increased in coronary microvascular walls.

Courtois et al., 2010 [128]
P25 Degussa TiO₂ (15)
Intratracheal instillation: 100 μg TiO₂ in 0.5 mL saline.
Male Wistar or Sprague Dawley rats
Intralobar arteries vasomotor responses to PGF2α, KCl, Ach: not altered.

Nemmar et al., 2011 [79]
Rutile Fe-doped TiO₂ (length: 80; diameter: 7)
Intratracheal instillation: 1, 5 mg/kg TiO₂
4 male Wistar rats per group
Cardiovascular parameter: HR and SBP increased

Ach, acetylcholine; Alpha-HBDH, alpha-hydroxybutyrate dehydrogenase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; CK, creatine kinase; HR, heart rate; KCl, Potassium chloride LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; PGF2α, prostaglandin F2α; ROS, reactive oxygen species; SBP, systolic blood pressure; TiO₂ NPs, titanium dioxide nanoparticles.

TiO₂ NPs are able to induce high LDH, creatine kinase (CK), alpha-hydroxybutyrate dehydrogenase (HBDH), and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) activities used as markers of myocardial lesions, irrespective of the form of TiO₂, anatase [122] or a mixture of anatase and rutile [129], or the route of exposure, intraperitoneal injections in mice [122], or oral gavage in rats [129]. Moreover, acute cardiotoxicity, in terms of higher serum LDH and alpha-HBDH enzymes, was demonstrated after a single oral gavage of TiO₂ NPs administered to mice [121]. Unfortunately, the lack of data regarding the LDH isoform prevents a clear correlation between these increases and cardiac insults. Moreover, the study performed by Wang et al. [121] did not provide information on TiO₂ form, and consequently, it does not allow comparisons with the two previous described works [122, 129].

When intratracheally instilled in rats, rutile Fe-doped TiO₂ nanorods significantly increased SBP and HR in treated animals, which could be the consequence of the systemic inflammation induced by the same particles [79].

Regarding the TiO₂ NP prothrombotic effect, the currently available data are conflicting. For instance, Chen et al. [22] observed thrombosis in the pulmonary vascular system of mice treated via intraperitoneal injection with anatase TiO₂ NPs. On the contrary, Bihari et al. [123] failed to confirm thrombosis induction in both the mesenteric and cremasteric circulation of mice given parentally rutile TiO₂ NPs. The higher exposure dose used by Chen et al. [22] compared to that of Bihari et al. [123], up to 2592 mg/kg versus 1 mg/kg, respectively, may be responsible for the induction of thrombosis ascribed to the blockage of blood vessels by TiO₂ particles. Moreover, the difference in the form of TiO₂ used by these two studies may explain some differences in the results. However, the very limited number of in vivo and in vitro studies on this regard does not support such conclusions. Thus, further studies are necessary to confirm these results and to investigate the mechanism(s) leading to thrombus formation.

The vasomotor response of the spinotrapezious muscle arterioles is impaired by P25 Degussa TiO₂ NP inhalation [124, 125]. This vascular impairment was due to a dose-dependent reduction in NO endothelium production induced by microvascular oxidative and nitrosative stress [125]. Local ROS production may consume endothelium-derived NO or compromise NO endogenous production leading to vascular dysfunction as confirmed by a partially restored NO production by radical scavenging.

The loss of microvascular vasodilator capacity can significantly influence the normal homeostasis in any organ, causing impairment of tissue perfusion and compromising organ function. In this context, a further study by the same group demonstrated that after TiO₂ NP exposure, coronary arteriole response to vasodilators was impaired though with conserved responsiveness to NO [126]. As previously detailed, the role motive of the increased microvascular ROS production was confirmed by the restored impairment after incubation with ROS scavengers [127].

Finally, vasomotor responses of intralobar pulmonary arteries removed from rats intratracheally exposed to Degussa TiO₂ NPs were not altered in a study carried out by Courtois et al. [128]. The ex vivo contractile response to prostaglandin F2α and KCl and the relaxant response to Ach were not altered by TiO₂ NP treatment [128, 130].

However, without appropriate particle characterization, it is difficult to compare findings between toxicological studies. Future studies are necessary to provide deeper knowledge regarding the toxic effects of TiO₂ NPs on the cardiovascular system.

2.5. Liver

The toxic effects of TiO₂ NPs on liver function were demonstrated in several studies through the detection of increases of AST, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) [21, 22, 79, 121, 122, 129, 131–133], ALP, pseudocholinesterase (PChE), leucine acid peptide (LAP), TP, ALB [21, 40, 122, 132, 133], and globulin (GLB) levels. Decreased ALB/GLB ratios [21, 132] and increased ALT/AST ratios, a more sensitive indicator of hepatic injury [121, 131, 134], have also been detected (Table 5).

Table 5: In vivo studies that investigated the adverse effects of TiO₂ NPs on liver.

Liver

References
Crystal phase composition (particle size in nm)
Type of exposure
Type and number of animals
Results

Wang et al., 2007 [121]
TiO₂ (25, 80, 155)
Intragastric administration: 5 g/kg TiO₂ in a minute.
20 male and female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Biochemical parameters: ALT and ALT/AST increased. Histology: hydropic degeneration and necrosis.

Fabian et al., 2008 [138]
Anatase-rutile TiO₂ mixture (20–30)
Intravenous injection: 5 mg/kg
3 male Wistar rats per group
Biochemical parameters: no alterations in TBIL, ALP, ALT, AST.

Liang et al., 2009 [30]
TiO₂ (5, 21)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.5–50 mg/kg TiO₂.
6 male and female Sprague Dawley rats per group
Biochemical parameters: no changes in TP, ALB, ALT, AST. Oxidative stress: decreased SOD and increased MDA activity.

Guo et al., 2009 [131]
N.A.
Intraperitoneal injections: 200 and 500 mg/kg TiO₂ every other day for 5 times.
15 male ICR mice per group
Biochemical parameters: ALT and AST/ALT increased.

Chen et al., 2009 [22]
Anatase TiO₂ (80–110)
Intraperitoneal injections: 324–2592 mg/kg TiO₂.
10 male and female ICR mice.
Biochemical parameters: ALT and AST increased. Histology: fibrosis, hydropic degeneration, necrotic, and apoptotic cells, NEUs were detected.

Liu et al., 2009; 2010 [122, 135]
Anatase TiO₂ (5) Bulk rutile TiO₂ (10–15 μm)
Intra-abdominal injections: 5–150 mg/kg BW anatase TiO₂ and 150 mg/kg bulk TiO₂ everyday for 14 days.
10 female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Biochemical parameters: ALT, ALP, ALB, glucose, TG, TCHO, HDL-C levels were increased by both particles; LAP, PChE, TP, were increased and TBIL was reduced by anatase TiO₂. Oxidative stress: induced by anatase TiO₂ in liver

Ma et al., 2009 [132]
See Liu et al., 2009 [122]
Biochemical serum parameters: ALT, ALP, AST, LDH, PChE, LAP, TCHO, and HDL-C increased by both particles; ALB, GLB, TG increased and LDL-C decreased by anatase TiO₂. Histology: basophilia, ischemia and vein congestion (both TiO₂). Apoptosis induced by anatase TiO₂. Inflammatory action: NF-kB, MIF, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-1β, CRP, IL-4, and IL-10 increased by anatase TiO₂.

Wu et al., 2009 [115]
Anatase TiO₂ () Rutile TiO₂ (; ) P25 Degussa TiO₂ (~21) TiO₂ (0.3–0.5 μm)
Cutaneous application: 24 mg of 5% TiO₂ test formulation on the dorsal interscapular skin
6 hairless mice (BALB/c/nu/nu) per group
Liver histology: TiO₂ penetrated the skin inducing necrosis. Oxidative stress: increased MDA activity in liver

Wang et al., 2009 [134]
Anatase TiO₂(diameter: ; thickness:10–15)
Intraarticular injection: 0.2–20 mg/kg TiO₂ in the knee joints every other day for 4 times.
10 male Sprague Dawley rats per group
Biochemical parameters: ALP decreased; AST/ALT, LDH increased. Histology: fatty degeneration, inflammatory cell infiltration.

Duan et al., 2010 [21]
Anatase TiO₂ (5)
Intragastric administration: 62.5–250 mg/kg TiO₂ for 30 consecutive days.
20 female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Biochemical parameters: ALT, ALP, AST, LDH, ChE, TP, TG, TCHO increased, ALB/GLB, TBIL decreased. Histology: blurred hepatocytes, congested vessels.

Cui et al., 2011 [133]
Anatase TiO₂ (5)
Intragastric administration: 5, 10, 50 mg/kg TiO₂ for 60 consecutive days.
20 female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Biochemical parameters: ALT, AST, ALP, LDH, PChE, LAP increased. Inflammatory action: IkB and IL-2 decreased; IKK1, IKK2, NF-kB, NF-kBP52–65, TNF-α, NIK, TLR-2, and TLR-4 increased. Histology: fatty degeneration, necrosis, apoptosis, inflammation.

Cui et al., 2010 [136]
Anatase TiO₂ (6.9)
Intragastric administration: 5, 10, 50 mg/kg TiO₂ for 60 consecutive days.
20 female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Histology: hepatocyte apoptosis. Oxidative stress: , H₂O₂, MDA, NO increased. Gene expression: SOD, CAT, GSH-Px, MT, GST, HSP70, P53, TF decreased, CYP1A increased.

Bu et al., 2010 [129]
Rutile-anatase TiO₂ mixture (<50)
Intragastric administration: 0, 0.16, 0.4, 1 g/kg TiO₂ once a day for 14 consecutive days.
16 male and female Wistar rats per group
¹H NMR urine analysis: increase in α-ketoglutarate, hippurate, histidine, TMAO, taurine, citrulline, acetate, PAG, and citrate levels; decrease in methionine and 3-D-HB levels ¹H NMR serum analysis: increase in TMAO, choline creatine, 3-D-HB, phosphocholine; decrease in glutamate, acetoacetate, glutathione, methionine, glutamine, and pyruvate. Histology: no alterations.

Li et al., 2010 [137]
Anatase TiO₂
Intra-abdominal injections: 5, 10, 50, 100, 150 mg/kg for 14 consecutive days.
10 female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Ti liver content: dose-dependent increase. Interaction with DNA: TiO₂ was bound on DNA, caused changes in DNA conformation, induced DNA cleavage.

Tang et al., 2010 [75]
TiO₂ (5)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.8, 4, 20 mg/kg TiO₂.
8 male Sprague Dawley rats per group
Biochemical parameters: ALT increased. ¹H NMR urine analysis: increase in valine, lactate,acetate, succinate, 2-OG, creatinine, taurine, TMAO, allantoin, hippurate1-2; decrease in citrate, DMA.

Tang et al., 2011 [40]
Anatase TiO₂ ()
Intratracheal instillation: 0.8, 4, 20 mg/kg TiO₂.
8 male Sprague Dawley rats per group
Biochemical parameters: ALB and GLU increased. ¹H NMR serum analysis: ketone bodies, choline, LDL, alanine, and GLU increased; lactate, creatine, and pyruvate decreased. TEM analysis: swollen hepatocytes, congested sinusoids.

Nemmar et al., 2011 [79]
Rutile Fe-doped TiO₂ (length: 80; diameter: 7)
Intratracheal instillation: 1, 5 mg/kg TiO₂
4 male Wistar rats per group
Biochemical parameters: AST and ALT increased. Histology: inflammatory cell infiltration, mainly LYMs.

Yamashita et al., 2011 [100]
TiO₂ (35)
Intravenous injection: 0.8 mg TiO₂ for 2 consecutive gestational days.
Pregnant mice
Ti distribution: TiO₂ detected in fetal liver

2-OG, 2-Oxoglutarate; 3-D-HB, 3-D-hydroxybutyrate; ALB, albumin; ALP, alkaline phosphatase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; CAT, catalase activity; ChE, cholinesterase; CRP, cross-reaction protein; CYP1A, cytochrome p450 1A; DMA, Dimethylamine; GLB, globulin; GLU. Glutamic acid; GSH-Px, glutathione peroxidase; GST, glutathione-S-transferase; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HSP70, heat shock protein 70; IL-, interleukin; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; LAP, leucine acid peptide; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; LYM, lymphocyte; MDA, malondialdehyde; MIF, migration inhibitory factor; MT, metallothionein; NO, nitric oxide; NEU, neutrophil; NF-kB, nucleic factor-kB; NIK, NF-κB-inducible kinase; NMR, nuclear magnetic resonance; PAG, phenylacetylglycine; PChE, pseudocolinesterase; SOD, superoxide dismutase; TBIL, total bilirubin; TCHO, total cholesterol; TEM, transmission electron microscopy; TF, transferrin; TG, triglycerides; TLR-, toll-like receptor-; TMAO, trimethylamine-N-oxide; TiO₂ NPs, titanium dioxide nanoparticles; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α; TP, total protein.

These results were obtained irrespective of the form of TiO₂, particularly anatase [22, 40, 115, 122, 132–135], rutile [79, 115] and P25 Degussa TiO₂ NPs [115]; the NP different size [115, 121] and shape [79]; the modified surface chemistry of the particles [79].

Other studies demonstrated TiO₂ NP hepatotoxicity effects, in terms of increased ALT levels and ALT/AST ratio both after a single oral administration [121] or repeated intraperitoneal treatments in mice [122], unfortunately, without reporting details regarding the form of TiO₂ used.

Moreover, the route of exposure, such as the intragastric [21, 121, 129, 133, 136], intraperitoneal [22, 122, 131, 132], intratracheal [40, 75]; dermal [115], or intraarticular [134], does not seem to determine different toxic effects on liver function, both in terms of type and entity of manifestation. The intraarticular administration was used by Wang et al. [134] to simulate the release of NPs into joint cavities from the nanocoated surface of prostheses considering the good prospects for application of nanomaterials in prosthetic implants.

Interestingly, anatase, rutile, and P25 Degussa TiO₂ NPs were able to penetrate the dorsal skin of hairless mice and to accumulate in the liver inducing oxidative stress, and focal necrosis in the parenchyma [115]. The potential role of an oxidative attack in causing liver damage was recently demonstrated in mice intragastrically [136] and intraperitoneally [135] exposed to nanoparticulate anatase TiO₂. ROS accumulation, lipid peroxidation, and altered expression of genes involved in antioxidative or detoxification processes were triggered by NP treatment [136].

Interesting results were obtained by Li et al. [137] analysing the interactions between anatase TiO₂ NPs and the DNA extracted by the liver of mice intraperitoneally exposed. They reported that nanoanatase TiO₂ could be inserted into DNA base pairs, bind to DNA nucleotide, and alter the secondary structure of DNA. Moreover, NPs could cause liver DNA cleavage and hepatocyte apoptosis [137].

Several studies also detected signs of hepatic damage in terms of histopathological changes and hepatocyte ultrastructural alterations that could lead to impaired liver function [21, 22, 115, 121, 132, 134], while only few did not confirm these results [30, 129]. Particularly, hepatic fibrosis hydropic [22, 121] and fatty [133, 134] degeneration of hepatocytes, prominent vasodilatation [21, 132], and focal ischemia were induced by TiO₂ NP treatment [132]. Necrotic [22, 121, 133] and apoptotic cells [132, 133, 136] were detected, and infiltration of inflammatory cells was also found [22, 79, 132–134]. The inflammatory reaction in response to NP insult was also confirmed by significant increase of both mRNA and protein expression levels of several inflammatory cytokines and mediators in liver of treated mice [132, 133].

Regarding the metabolic homeostasis of mice treated with TiO₂ NPs, several studies demonstrated increased contents of triglycerides (TG), total cholesterol (TCHO) [21, 122, 132], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) [122, 132], and glucose [122] compared to controls, while low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) resulted lower [132].

Moreover, recent metabonomic studies, demonstrated the ability of TiO₂ NPs to cause a series of changes in endogenous metabolite levels in the ¹H nuclear magnetic Resonance (NMR) spectra of urine and serum [40, 75, 129], both after repeated intragastric doses of a mixture of rutile and anatase TiO₂ NPs [129] and after acute intratracheal instillation of no characterised TiO₂ NPs [75]. These findings support the role of TiO₂ NPs in leading disturbances in the energy and amino acids metabolism through hepatotoxic effects and confirm the changes in liver function previously described.

Regarding the intravenous exposure, Yamashita et al. [100] detected TiO₂ NPs in fetal liver after NP injections into pregnant mice, Fabian et al. [138] failed to show any hepatic toxicity in rats treated with injection of a mixture of anatase and rutile TiO₂ NPs.

Negative results in terms of alteration in liver parameters were reported also in rats treated with a single intratracheal instillation of TiO₂ NPs [30]. Interestingly, in this study, even if functional and histological liver lesions could not be demonstrated, hepatic superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity was reduced, and MDA levels were increased suggesting a possible role of oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation generated by NP exposure, perhaps as an early sign of damage, previous to clear functional parameter alterations. These findings are in line with the in vivo results previously detailed [115, 135, 136] and those obtained in vitro by Shi et al. [139] showing increased ROS and MDA in TiO₂ NP-exposed hepatocytes.

In conclusion, though all of the studies reviewed in this section concentrate on hepatotoxic effects of TiO₂ NPs, the current knowledge in this field is not yet exhaustive, and further investigation is necessary to fully elucidate the pathogenesis of the liver damage and the potential relationship between liver toxicity and the different characteristics of NPs. Interestingly, the interactions between TiO₂ NPs and DNA, both direct or indirect, such as those mediated by oxidative stress, deserve greater attention in order to the understand their potential role in the mechanisms underlining genotoxic and carcinogenic effects. Moreover, no data are present in literature on the in vivo effects of NPs on the gastric and intestinal systems, and only limited studies on cells of the latter system have been performed in vitro. In our opinion, this aspect should be deeply investigated in future research due to its great importance, particularly considering the possibility of NPs penetrating into organisms through the intestines.

2.6. Hematopoietic and Immunological Systems

Only few studies have investigated the influence of TiO₂ NP exposure on hematological parameters reporting conflicting results (Table 6). Evidence for NP-related upregulation of systemic inflammation, assessed by increased white cell count, was provided by several studies [43, 79, 129], whereas Duan et al. [21] failed to confirm these findings. Particularly, they demonstrated that the reduced levels of CD3, CD4, CD8-competent T lymphocytes, B, and natural killer (NK) cells and the reduced ratio of CD4 to CD8 detected were a clear sign of a disturbance of the cellular immune function and of the inhibition of the immune response of mice. Differences in the TiO₂ form used, rutile [43, 79] versus anatase [21] versus a mixture of the two [129], the shape of the particles, nanorods [43, 79] versus NPs [21, 129], administration route, intratracheal [43, 79] versus intragastric [21, 129], and the length of exposure, acute [43, 79] versus subchronic [21, 129] may account for the discrepancies between the previous reviewed studies.

Table 6: In vivo studies that investigated the adverse effects of TiO₂ NPs on hematopoietic and immunological systems.

Hematopoietic and immunological systems

References
Crystal phase composition (particle size in nm)
Type of exposure
Type and number of animals
Results

Wang et al., 2007 [121]
TiO₂ (25, 80, 155)
Intragastric administration: 5 g/kg TiO₂ in a minute.
20 male and female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Spleen histology: no alterations.

Nemmar et al., 2008 [43]
Rutile TiO₂ nanorods (4–6)
Intratracheal instillation: 1, 5 mg/kg TiO₂.
6-7 male Wistar rats per group
Blood parameters: increased MONs and GRAs, decreased PLTs.

Chen et al., 2009 [22]
Anatase TiO₂ (80–110)
Intraperitoneal injections: 324–2592 mg/kg TiO₂.
10 male and female ICR mice.
Spleen histology: severe lesions; NEU infiltration.

Li et al., 2010 [140]
Anatase TiO₂ (~6-7)
Intraperitoneal injections: 5–150 mg/kg TiO₂ every day for 45 days.
20 female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Oxidative stress in spleen: increased ROS and MDA. Spleen histology: congestion, lymph nodule proliferation, splenocyte apoptosis. Apoptosis mechanism: TiO₂ activated caspase −3 and −9, decreased Bcl-2, increased Bax and cytochromec.

Liang et al., 2009 [30]
TiO₂ (5, 21)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.5–50 mg/kg TiO₂.
6 male and female Sprague Dawley rats per group
Oxidative stress: decreased SOD activity in plasma.

Duan et al., 2010 [21]
Anatase TiO₂ (5)
Intragastric administration: 62.5–250 mg/kg TiO₂
20 female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Blood parameters: WBC, RBC, Hb, mean corpuscular Hb concentration, thrombocytes, reticulocytes decreased; mean corpuscular volume, mean corpuscular Hb, red cell distribution width, PLTs, HT, mean PLT volume increased. Immunological parameters: CD3, CD4, CD8, CD4/CD8, B, and NK cells decreased. Inflammatory action: IL-2 decreased and NO increased by TiO₂.

Bu et al., 2010 [129]
Rutile-anatase TiO₂ mixture (<50)
Intragastric administration: 0.16–1 g/kg TiO₂ once a day for 14 consecutive days.
16 male and female Wistar rats per group
Blood parameters: WBC, LYMs, MONs, EOS increased. Spleen histology: no alterations.

Rossi et al., 2010 [71]
Silica coated rutile TiO₂ (~) Rutile TiO₂ (<5 μm)
Inhalation:  mg/m³ TiO₂ for 2 hr a day, 3 days a wk, for 4 wks.
8 female BALB/c/Sca mice per group
Inflammatory action: TiO₂ NPs decreased TNF-α and IL-13 expression in spleen cells.

Nemmar et al., 2011 [79]
Rutile Fe-doped nanorod TiO₂ (length: 80; diameter: 7)
Intratracheal instillation: 1, 5 mg/kg TiO₂
4 male Wistar rats per group
Blood parameters: WBC, IL-6, SOD, GSH, PLTs increased.

Moon et al., 2011 [116]
TiO₂ (<25, <100)
Intraperitoneal injections: once a day for 7 days
Mice
Spleen cells: splenocytes, CD4+, LPS stimulated NK cells CD8+ decreased; B-lymphocyte development and LPS-stimulated spleen cell proliferation were retarded by TiO₂.

Wang et al., 2011 [141]
Anatase TiO₂
Intragastric administration: 5–150 mg/kg TiO₂ for 30 consecutive days.
20 female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Spleen histology: congestion, lymph nodule proliferation. Oxidative stress: , H₂O₂, MDA levels, and p38, JNK, NF-kB, Nrf-2, and HO-1 expression increased in spleen.

EOS, eosinophil; GRA, granulocyte; GSH, reduced glutathione; Hb; haemoglobin; HT, hematocrit; HO-1, Heme oxygenase-1; IL-, interleukin; JNK, c-Jun N-terminal kinase; LPS, lipopolysaccharide; LYM, lymphocyte; MDA, malondialdehyde; MON, Monocyte; NEU, neutrophil; NF-kB, nucleic factor-kB; NK, natural killer; Nrf-2, nuclear factor-E2-related factor-2; PLT, platelet; RBC, red blood cells; ROS, reactive oxygen species; SOD, superoxide dismutase; TiO₂ NPs, titanium dioxide nanoparticles; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α; WBC, white blood cells.

Moreover, Nemmar et al. [43] detected a reduced number of platelets in vivo due to a possible aggregation confirming the results obtained by the same authors in vitro. Unfortunately, these results were not confirmed when rats were intratracheally exposed to Fe-doped TiO₂ nanorods, suggesting a potential role of the particle surface chemistry in influencing hematological effects in vivo [79].

However, all of these data should be interpreted as preliminary results and must be confirmed by future studies.

Other recent works have also investigated the effects of anatase TiO₂ NPs on a key organ of the immunological system, the spleen, following both intraperitoneal injections [22, 116, 122, 140] or intragastric administrations [141] (Table 6). These studies revealed that TiO₂ NPs are able to accumulate in the spleen in a dose-dependent manner [22, 122, 140] inducing histopathological damage. Apoptotic morphological changes [140], accumulation of neutrophils [22], congestion of the splenic tissue, and lymph node proliferation [140, 141] were detected. Moreover, reduction in total splenocyte, CD4 and CD8 T-lymphocyte number, retardation in B-lymphocyte development, and reduction in LPS stimulated NK cells were reported after exposure to TiO₂ NPs [116].

A recent study [71], demonstrated that, in ovalbumin-sensitized mice, silica, coated rutile TiO₂ NP inhalation decreased TNF-α and IL-13 expression in spleen cells.

On the other hand, Wang et al. [121] failed to reveal abnormal pathological changes in mouse spleen after a single intragastric administration. Unfortunately, this study lacks details regarding the form of the TiO₂ employed.

TiO₂ NPs induced increased ROS and MDA in the spleen [140, 141] and decreased levels of SOD antioxidant activity in plasma after intratracheal instillation in rats [30]. Oxidative stress was thought to play an important role in triggering the mitochondrial-mediated apoptotic pathway demonstrated in the spleen tissue [140].

However, the limited number of studies investigating the hematological and immunological effects of TiO₂ NPs do not allow comparison and extrapolation of certain conclusions. Further research is necessary to confirm these results and to shed light on the roles of NP characteristics in inducing the alterations described above.

2.7. Renal System

Several studies report alterations, although opposite in some cases, of renal functional parameters, such as increased [40, 75, 121, 131] and reduced [122, 134, 142] blood urea nitrogen (BUN), increased [75, 121, 142] and decreased [134] creatinine (Cr), and reduced uric acid (UA) levels [122, 142] (Table 7). The impact of TiO₂ NP treatment on the renal function was ulteriourly confirmed by the altered levels of metabolic products in the urine and serum of intratracheally exposed rats investigated by ¹H NMR analysis [40, 75]. However, the clear interpretation of these data and the causative mechanisms are not fully understood. Unfortunately, of these studies, only few characterize the TiO₂ form used as anatase [40, 122, 134, 142], while the others lack TiO₂ particle characterization [75, 121, 131]. Moreover, the different routes of exposure employed to investigate nephrotoxicity, such as intraperitoneal [122, 131, 142], intra-articular [134], intragastric [121], and intratracheal [75] administrations, do not allow a clear comparison of the results obtained.

Table 7: In vivo studies that investigated the adverse effects of TiO₂ NPs on renal system.

Renal system

References
Crystal phase composition (particle size in nm)
Type of exposure
Type and number of animals
Results

Wang et al., 2007 [121]
TiO₂ (25, 80, 155)
Intragastric administration: 5 g/kg TiO₂ in a minute.
20 male and female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Biochemical parameters: BUN, Cr increased by 25, 80 nm TiO₂. Histology: proteinic liquids in renal tubules, glomerulus swelling.

Fabian et al., 2008 [138]
Anatase-rutile TiO₂ mixture (20–30)
Intravenous injection: 5 mg/kg
3 male Wistar rats per group
Biochemical parameters: no alterations in BUN and Cr.

Liang et al., 2009 [30]
TiO₂ (5, 21)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.5–50 mg/kg TiO₂.
6 male and female Sprague Dawley rats per group
Biochemical parameters: no alterations in BUN and Cr. Oxidative stress: decreased SOD and GSH-PX, increased MDA renal activity (5 nm TiO₂).

Chen et al., 2009 [22]
Anatase TiO₂ (80–110)
Intraperitoneal injections: 324–2592 mg/kg TiO₂.
10 male and female ICR mice.
Biochemical parameters: no alterations in BUN. Histology: glomerulus swelling, proteinic liquids in renal tubules.

Liu et al., 2009 [122]
Anatase TiO₂ (5) Bulk rutile TiO₂ (10–15 μm)
Intra-abdominal injections: 5–150 mg/kg BW anatase TiO₂ and 150 mg/kg bulk TiO₂ everyday for 14 days.
10 female CD-1 (ICR) mice per group
Biochemical parameters: UA and BUN dcreased by both TiO₂.

Guo et al., 2009 [131]
N.A.
Intraperitoneal injections: 200 and 500 mg/kg TiO₂ every other day for 5 times.
15 male ICR mice per group
Biochemical parameters: BUN increased.

Wang et al., 2009 [134]
Anatase TiO₂ (diameter: ; thickness: 10–15)
Intraarticular injection: 0.2–20 mg/kg TiO₂ in the knee joints every other day for 4 times.
10 male Sprague Dawley rats per group
Biochemical parameters: BUN and Cr decreased. Histology: proteinic liquids in renal tubules.

Tang et al., 2010 [75]
TiO₂ (5)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.8–20 mg/kg TiO₂.
8 male Sprague Dawley rats per group
Biochemical parameters: BUN and Cr increased. ¹H NMR urine analysis: increase in valine, lactate,acetate, succinate, 2-OG, creatinine, taurine, TMAO, allantoin, hippurate1-2; decrease in citrate, DMA.

Tang et al., 2011 [40]
Anatase TiO₂ ()
Intratracheal instillation: 0.8–20 mg/kg TiO₂.
8 male Sprague Dawley rats per group
Biochemical parameters: BUN increased. ¹H NMR serum analysis: ketone, bodies, choline, LDL, alanine and GLU increased; lactate, creatine, and pyruvate decreased. TEM analysis: tubule epithelial cell damage, vascular deformity.

Zhao et al., 2010 [142]
Anatase TiO₂
Intra-abdominal injections: N.A.
Mice
Biochemical parameters: Cr, Ca²⁺, phosphonium increased, BUN and UA decreased. Oxidative stress: ROS, LPO increased, superoxide dismutase, catalase, ascorbate peroxidase, total antioxidant capacity, glutathione, and ascorbic acid content decreased.

2-OG, 2-Oxoglutarate; BUN, blood urea nitrogen; Cr, creatinine; DMA, Dimethylamine; GLU, glutamic acid; GSH-Px, glutathione peroxidase; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; LPO, lipid peroxidation; MDA, malondialdehyde; ROS, reactive oxygen species; SOD, superoxide dismutase; TiO₂ NPs, titanium dioxide nanoparticles; TMAO, trimethylamine-N-oxide; UA, uric acid.

On the other hand, different studies did not report TiO₂ NP-induced nephrotoxicity neither following intravenous exposure to a mixture of anatase and rutile [138] nor after anatase intraperitoneal injections [22], nor following intratracheal instillation with no characterized TiO₂ NP suspension [30]. In this latter study, pathological changes were not observed in kidney tissues. In contrast, renal glomerulus swelling [22] and deposition of proteinic liquid in renal proximal tubules were described [22, 121, 134], also without functional damage [22].

The role of oxidative stress as a possible triggering mechanism for TiO₂ NP inducing kidney damage was demonstrated by increased ROS generation [142], enhanced lipid peroxidation [30], as well as decreased SOD, catalase, ascorbate peroxidase, and glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px) antioxidant activities [30, 142]. Surprisingly, these changes were detected also in a study where functional alterations were not present, suggesting their role as an early sign of damage, previous to clear functional parameter alterations [30].

These fragmented data require confirmation and further investigation, which should focus on the role played by the different characteristics of TiO₂ NPs in inducing such alterations.

2.8. Musculoskeletal System

Two studies investigated the biological tolerance of TiO₂ NPs when implanted in rat living tissues [143, 144] (Table 8). Interest in this type of research emerges from the promising utilization of NPs in numerous fields of medicine and the not fully understood potential reactions at the tissue-material interface. Inflammation and granulomas were detected in the vicinity of intramuscularly implanted TiO₂ NPs as a normal reaction to a “foreign body,” but no signs of intolerance were observed in both studies at 6 or 12 months postimplantation.

Table 8: In vivo studies that investigated the adverse effects of TiO₂ NPs on musculoskeletal and reproductive systems.

Musculoskeletal system

References
Crystal phase composition (particle size in nm)
Type of exposure
Type and number of animals
Results

Hansen et al., 2006 [143]
TiO₂ (70) Bulk TiO₂ (diameter: 0.9 mm; height: 1 mm)
Subcutaneous (bulk) and intramuscular (NPs) implantation in rat back for 6 or 12 months.
10 Male SpragueDawley rats
Local reaction: presence of granulomas (NPs), inflammatory infiltrates (bulk); no local intolerance (both).

Gatti et al., 2008 [144]
TiO₂ (70) Bulk TiO₂ (diameter: 6–12 mm; height: 2 mm)
Subcutaneous (bulk) and intramuscular (NPs) implantation in rat back for 6 or 12 months.
10 male SpragueDawley rats
Local reaction: granulomas (NPs), inflammatory infiltrates (bulk).

Wang et al., 2009 [134]
Anatase TiO₂ (diameter: ; thickness: 10–15)
Intraarticular injection: 0.2, 2, 20 mg/kg TiO₂ in the knee joints every other day for 4 times.
10 male Sprague Dawley rats per group
Oxidative stress in synovium: GSH-Px, GSH, GSSG, MDA, and SOD increased. Histology: synovium hypertrophy, LYMs, plasma cell infiltration, and fibroblast proliferation.

Onuma et al., 2009 [145]
Hydrophilic rutile TiO₂ treated with ZrO₂Al(OH)₃ (minor axis: 40–70; major axis 200–300) Hydrophobic rutile TiO₂ treated with ZrO₂Al(OH)₃ and steric acid (minor axis: 40–70; major axis 200–300)
Subcutaneous injections: QR-32 cells alone; QR-32 cells mixed with 5 mg/0.1 mL TiO₂; and 5 mg/0.1 mL TiO₂ 30 and 70 days before QR-32 cells injection. Intravenous injections: tumor cell lines into mice (5/line).
15 female C57BL/6 mice per group
Carcinogenicity: QR-32 cells became tumorigenic after injection in sites implanted for 30 days or 70 days with hydrophilic TiO₂. Metastatic ability: acquired by tumor cell lines derived from QR-32 cells injected in site preimplanted with both TiO₂.

Reproductive system

Guo et al., 2009 [131]
N.A.
Intraperitoneal injections: 200 and 500 mg/kg TiO₂ every other day for 5 times.
15 male ICR mice per group
Reproductive effects: reduced sperm density and motility, increased sperm abnormality, and germ cell apoptosis.

Takeda et al., 2009 [101]
Anatase TiO₂ (25–70)
Subcutaneous injections: 100 μL of TiO₂ at 1 mg/mL at 3, 7, 10 and 14 days post-coitum.
6 pregnant Slc:ICR mice per group
Reproductive effects: disorganised and disrupted seminiferous tubules, few mature sperm, decreased sperm production, epidididymal sperm motility, number of Sertoli cells.

GSH, reduced glutathione; GSH-Px, glutathione peroxidase; GSSG, oxidized glutathione; LYM, lymphocyte; MDA, malondialdehyde; SOD, superoxide dismutase; TiO₂ NPs, titanium dioxide nanoparticles.

Moreover, an inflammatory reaction, characterized by hypertrophy of the sinovial membrane, infiltration of lymphocytes and plasma cells, and proliferation of fibroblasts, was observed in rat knee joints when TiO₂ NP suspensions were intraarticularly injected [134]. NPs were also able to stimulate oxidative stress as demonstrated by increases of antioxidants, such as GSH-Px and SOD activities, which were elevated to overcome an increase in ROS production.

TiO₂ NPs were able to convert benign nonmetastatic tumor cells into malignant metastatic ones in a manner dependent on the NP surface chemistry and the ability to produce ROS in the target cells [145]. In particular, poorly tumorigenic and nonmetastatic QR-32 fibrosarcoma cells became tumorigenic only after injection into subcutaneous sites previously implanted with hydrophilic ZrO₂Al(OH)₃-treated TiO₂ NPs. Moreover, tumor cell lines derived from the QR-32 cells of both TiO₂ NP preimplanted sites acquired a pulmonary and extrapulmonary metastatic phenotype when intravenously injected in mice. Both the 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG) adduct and 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal-positive cells, induced by oxidative stress action, were increased in the hydrophobic ZrO₂Al(OH)₃ plus steric acid-treated TiO₂ NP implantation sites compared to the hydrophilic one.

In conclusion, future research should investigate musculoskeletal tissue-TiO₂ NP interactions, especially considering the potential widespread utilization of TiO₂ NPs in biomedical products.

2.9. Reproductive System

Only few studies investigated the effects of TiO₂ NPs on the male reproductive system [101, 131] (Table 8). Guo et al. [131] demonstrated reductions in sperm density and motility and an increase in sperm abnormality and germ cell apoptosis in mice treated with intraperitoneal injections of TiO₂ NPs. Testes and epididymis did not show pathological changes.

When mice were prenatally exposed to anatase TiO₂ NPs via subcutaneous injections of dams they showed aggregates of NPs in Leydig cells, Sertoli cells, and spermatids in the testes [101]. Disorganized and disrupted seminiferous tubules, tubule lumens with few mature sperm, as well as decreases in daily sperm production, epididymal sperm motility, and numbers of Sertoli cells were also observed [101, 146].

Such limited knowledge regarding the reproductive toxicological effects of TiO₂ NPs and the relevance of this topic makes future investigations a matter of urgency.

2.10. Genotoxicity

TiO₂ NP genotoxicity is poorly studied in vivo, and the mechanisms involved have not been clearly defined. To our knowledge, only two studies have investigated in vivo genotoxic effects and report contrasting results (Table 9). One study [147] demonstrated that TiO₂ NPs are inert to lung cells, while the other [148] found that NPs induce genotoxicity in organs such as the blood, bone marrow, and embryos.

Table 9: In vivo studies that investigated the genotoxic effects of TiO₂ NPs.

Genotoxicity

References
Crystal phase composition (particle size in nm)
Type of exposure
Type and number of animals
Results

Rehn et al., 2003 [147]
P25 Degussa TiO₂ (~20) T805 TiO₂ (~20)
Intratracheal instillation: 0.15–1.2 mg TiO₂.
30 female Wistar rats per group
Inflammatory action: TCC, AMs, NEUs, TPC, phosphatidylcholine, TNF-α increased. Genotoxicity: no changes in 8-oxoGua levels.

Trouiller et al., 2009 [148]
P25 Degussa TiO₂ (21)
Oral administration: 5 mL of 60–600 μg/mL TiO₂ for 5 consecutive days. Pregnant dams: supplemented TiO₂ drinking water for 10 days at a concentration of 300 μg/mL.
5 C57Bl/6Jpun/pun mice per group
Inflammatory action: blood TNF-α, IFN-γ, KC increased. Genotoxicity: increase in DNA deletion in in utero treated mice (eyespots per RPE); DNA double strand breaks in bone marrow cells (γ-H2AX foci formation) and in WBC (comet assay); MN in ERYs; 8-OhdG in liver.

8-OhdG, 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine; 8-oxoGua, 8-oxoguanine; AM, alveolar macrophage; ERY, erythrocyte; IFN-γ, interferon- γ; KC, mouse orthologue of interleukin-8; MN, micronuclei; NEU, neutrophil; RPE, retinal pigment epithelium; TCC, total cell count; TiO₂ NPs, titanium dioxide nanoparticles; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α; TPC, total protein content; WBC, white blood cells.

Specifically, Rehn et al. [147] showed that both hydrophilic P25 Degussa TiO₂ NPs and hydrophobic trimethoxyoctylsilane-treated T805 TiO₂ NPs intratracheally instilled in rats failed to induce persistent inflammation in BAL. The single lung cell immunohistochemical detection of 8-oxoguanine revealed no differences between both NP-treated groups and controls.

Trouiller et al. [148] exposed adult and pregnant dam mice to water supplemented with solutions containing P25 Degussa TiO₂ NPs. Eyespots, a measure of DNA deletion, increased in in utero TiO₂ NP-treated mice compared to controls. A dose-dependent increase in DNA double-strand breaks was also detected in bone marrow cells and an increased tail moment was evident in peripheral white blood cells of treated mice. MN frequency and the level of 8-OHdG were higher in peripheral blood erythrocytes and in the livers of TiO₂ NP-exposed mice, respectively. Moreover, TNF-α, interferon (INF)-γ and the mouse orthologue of IL-8 were increased after exposure. These studies evaluated both genotoxic effects and inflammatory parameters, because most in vitro TiO₂ NP genotoxicity studies have suggested that NPs could damage DNA directly or indirectly via oxidative stress and/or inflammatory responses [148]. The discrepancies between in vivo results reproduce the conflicting in vitro findings [33]. However, though the limited number of in vivo studies does not allow one to extrapolate conclusions, we hypothesize that different TiO₂ forms, particle sizes, degrees of aggregation, preparation methods, incubation conditions, doses, and susceptibility between cell types influence responses to TiO₂ NPs.

Interestingly, the study carried out by Trouiller et al. [148] is the first showing that DNA deletions in offspring are increased by in utero exposure to TiO₂ NPs. This finding is of great importance considering the high susceptibility of embryonic cells to DNA damage and widespread environmental and occupational TiO₂ NP exposure.

In conclusion, there are concerns regarding the potential risk of genetic disorders, particularly for people occupationally exposed to high doses of TiO₂ NPs. Thus, further research is necessary to fully understand genotoxic TiO₂ NP effects and to determine the conditions in which they occur to fully evaluate NP exposure risks.

3. Discussion

Our analysis pointed out interesting and critical aspects, particularly in relation to the interaction between NP-induced effects and remarkable treatment parameters, such as routes of exposure, TiO₂ form, NP size, and surface reactivity, that we argue will be the focus of future research. In all the studies reviewed, the commonly proposed pathogenic mechanisms initiated by TiO₂ NPs are dominated by inflammation-driven effects, including fibrosis, oxidative stress, and DNA damage, making inflammation a target for toxicological testing [7, 11, 149, 150]. Regarding the respiratory tract, which is considered the most affected organ, lung overload is thought to be responsible for the induction of inflammation, ROS production, and ultimately lung damage. Indeed, it should be carefully evaluated in future studies for both its “volumetric,” “mass,” and “surface area” determinants. Future research will be also necessary to clarify which NP characteristic could play a triggering role in the cascade of events responsible for lung injury. Moreover, a correct evaluation of the risk derived from TiO₂ NP respiratory exposure should be performed in consideration of the significant role of this route of exposure for both the general and occupational populations. Particularly, in the latter setting, an appropriate risk assessment focused on the pattern of absorption, the role of the total inhaled amount, direct lung alteration, and/or damages in other distant organs, could greatly influence both the risk communication and the risk management phases, the adoption of valuable methods of environmental and biological monitoring, and the measures of collective and individual protection.

Interestingly, inhaled TiO₂ NPs resulted able to be translocate to the CNS via the axons of sensory neurons in the upper respiratory tract [31, 91, 92]. This is an intriguing aspect because it introduces a route for TiO₂ NP exposure directly linked to the CNS, in which NPs could elicit their toxic effects. These findings underscore the need for additional studies to further elucidate underlying mechanisms and to characterize the physiological impact, particularly in relation to which NP characteristics could influence this passage. The confirmation of this potential route of exposure may be extremely important for the general and occupational population, because the direct translocation of NPs to the CNS through the olfactory bulb could requires greater attention in public and workplace settings, as well as the urgent adoption of adequate protective measures.

Dermal studies have shown that there is currently little evidence for skin penetration and systemic exposure after dermal applications of TiO₂ NPs used in sunscreens [107, 109, 112, 113]. However, the open question has been raised as to whether the usual testing with healthy, intact skin is sufficient [151, 152].

Regarding other organs, the data are too limited to extrapolate general concepts, and additional studies are required, which may offer new details regarding TiO₂ NP absorption, systemic uptake, and kinetics, providing a deeper knowledge of the TiO₂ NP toxicological profile. In this context, it could be helpful to investigate new, noninvasive, powerful techniques aimed to identify early pathological metabolic and toxicological processes induced by NPs [40, 153–155]. Among these methods, metabonomics provide a relatively complete biological summary of the whole body response to NPs, and an appropriate identification of tissue damage biomarkers [40].

Moreover, while TiO₂ has been classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B) [28, 29], no definite conclusion is present for TiO₂ NPs. The NIOSH recently determined that inhaled ultrafine TiO₂ is a potential occupational carcinogen and recommended an exposure limit of 0.3 mg/m³ for ultrafine (including engineered nanoscale) TiO₂ as a TWA concentration for up to 10 hr/day during a 40-hour work week [15]. This conclusion was due to weight of scientific data demonstrating TiO₂ NP carcinogenic effect on rat lungs [56]. Interestingly, NIOSH has reviewed that the tumor response observed in rats exposed to TiO₂ NPs resulted from a secondary genotoxic mechanism involving chronic inflammation and cell proliferation [15]. The central hypothesis is that inflammation leads genotoxic events as well as cell proliferation and tissue remodeling, which are processes that are all required for mutations and progression towards neoplastic lesions [156]. However, the mutagenic or epigenetic mechanisms underlying the TiO₂ NP carcinogenic action need ulterior confirms and their role in the multistep process of carcinogenesis, likely as trigger of the initiation, promotion or progression phases of tumor manifestation, should be deeply elucidated [33]. This argument merits much attention in future studies with a particular focus on the conditions in which TiO₂ NP genotoxicity and carcinogenicity occur particularly in relation to the potential influence played by different particle production, size, degree of aggregation, preparation method, exposure conditions, dose, and susceptibility of animal species [33, 148, 157, 158]. These results will be of great importance in order to deeply characterize the risk of TiO₂ NP exposure and to define suitable exposure limits.

The relevance of the toxicological research in animals lies on the possibility to evaluate the type and entity of the adverse response induced by different doses of TiO₂ NPs and to extrapolate threshold levels aimed to protect exposed human populations. The general dose-response model indicates that the higher the concentration of a chemical substance, the greater is the influence on the organism [5]. However, in nanotoxicological research, the dose-response relationship requires special attention considering that the traditional mass dose does not well reflect the biologically effective dose for NPs. Other dose metrics, such as surface area combined with surface reactivity or the particle number, should be evaluated as ulterior, maybe better, descriptors of the potential to cause damage at the site of particle deposition or far from this [32, 82, 159, 160]. In this context, a TiO₂ NP standardized characterization including parameters like TiO₂ form, NP number, and mass concentration, size, shape, state of agglomeration, charge, crystallinity, solubility, oxidant generation capacity, added functional groups, or impurities and rate of dissolution is the first step to a comprehensive identification of the TiO₂ NP hazard [2, 7]. It seems necessary to focus future research on establishing a matrix of relationship between specific NP properties and resultant biological activities. In fact, nanotoxicology literature indicates that the combination of various physicochemical features in any type of NP leads to different interaction with biological systems and consequently to different toxic potentials [34, 61, 161, 162]. A deeper understanding of parameters able to alter the TiO₂ NP bioactivity would support a practical approach in the development of “safe” engineered NPs, through the choice of a particular TiO₂ form, shape, or surface functionalization [163].

From the studies, we reviewed a great methodological heterogeneity has emerged in terms of type of TiO₂ NPs employed, animal species treated, route of exposure, doses applied, endpoint parameters, and techniques of measurement. This causes a biased assessment of the exposure-response relationships, prevents comparison between results and extrapolation of definite conclusions [161]. Moreover, results obtained employing extremely high doses of TiO₂ NPs and unrealistic routes of administration, such as bolus instillation or aspiration delivery, should be interpreted with caution as preliminary findings to be validated under more realistic exposure conditions [164]. However, these preliminary data could be useful to plan future experimental projects aimed to reveal early signs of more severe damages induced by higher dose treatments [33, 165].

Currently, concerns regarding nanotechnology in everyday life are emerging, particularly those relative to the risks posed by occupational exposure, in consideration of the increasing number of workers employed in research, manufacture, use, and disposal of nanomaterials [163, 166]. Indeed, although not definite, the potential risk for adverse effects in NP exposed workers demands that industry, labor, and government concert action to a precautionary NP risk management to protect worker health [161, 167–172]. Critical steps in reaching this target are an appropriate risk assessment, based on epidemiologic research and exposure evaluation, and the determination of the effective function of risk management programs [163]. Epidemiologic studies are essential in understanding health outcomes associated with exposure to potentially hazardous materials. Such studies will form the basis for quantitative risk estimations to establish levels that protect human health. Currently, only NIOSH has recommended a TiO₂ NP exposure limit, however, regulating TiO₂ NPs appears to be a challenging task due to the broad diversity of the NP characteristics and their application in a wide range of sectors and products [173]. Moreover, it has to be questioned if a generic threshold limit, without any specification relative to the particle characterization and the context of employment, could have a suitable role in protecting health and safety of occupational exposed subjects.

NP exposure in workplace settings should receive much attention in future research. At present, the relative newness of exposure scenarios, generally occurring in controlled situations, the inconsistencies over the way to identify and classify nanomaterials, questions about metrics and practical instrumentation, and difficulty in gaining access to workplaces mostly prevent such essential assessment [174–180].

Additionally, as a part of the occupational exposure and health effect evaluation, future studies should focus at identifying NP-associated biomarkers. In this regard, a deeper knowledge about TiO₂ NP mechanisms of disease, and TiO₂ NP biokinetics and potential health effects, obtained from in vitro and in vivo experiments, respectively, could be useful to identify indicators of early biological events and to establish appropriate methods for their detection. Experimentally identified biomarkers should be the focus of subsequent validation studies aimed to define their ability in exploring human disease endpoints [6]. Such confirmed biological indicators of exposure and effect could be of great relevance to the development of occupational health surveillance strategies and also to verify the appropriateness of collective and individual defense systems adopted during NP manipulation.

Finally, interpreting and communicating hazard and risk information is an integral part of the TiO₂ NP risk management that clearly requires additional research to more thoroughly understand the toxicological interactions of these NPs with biological systems at the molecular, cellular, organ, and whole body level.

References

NSF (National Science Foundation), “Societal implications of nanoscience and nanotechnology,” Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology (NSET) Workshop Report, Arlington, Va, USA, 2001.

V. Castranova, “Overview of current toxicological knowledge of engineered nanoparticles,” Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 53, supplement 6, pp. S14–S17, 2011.

M. C. Roco, “Science and technology integration for increased human potential and societal outcomes,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol. 1013, pp. 1–16, 2004.

R. D. Handy and B. J. Shaw, “Toxic effects of nanoparticles and nanomaterials: implications for public health, risk assessment and the public perception of nanotechnology,” Health, Risk and Society, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 125–144, 2007.

M. P. Ling, C. P. Chio, W. C. Chou et al., “Assessing the potential exposure risk and control for airborne titanium dioxide and carbon black nanoparticles in the workplace,” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 877–889, 2011.

N. Li and A. E. Nel, “Feasibility of biomarker studies for engineered nanoparticles: what can be learned from air pollution research,” Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 53, supplement 6, pp. S74–S79, 2011.

P. J. A. Borm, D. Robbins, S. Haubold et al., “The potential risks of nanomaterials: a review carried out for ECETOC,” Particle and Fibre Toxicology, vol. 3, article 11, 2006.

R. A. Yokel and R. C. MacPhail, “Engineered nanomaterials: exposures, hazards, and risk prevention,” Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, vol. 6, no. 1, article 7, 2011.

M. J. D. Clift, P. Gehr, and B. Rothen-Rutishauser, “Nanotoxicology: a perspective and discussion of whether or not in vitro testing is a valid alternative,” Archives of Toxicology, vol. 85, no. 7, pp. 723–731, 2011.

G. Oberdörster, E. Oberdörster, and J. Oberdörster, “Nanotoxicology: an emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles,” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 113, no. 7, pp. 823–839, 2005.

A. E. Nel, T. Xia, L. Madler, and N. Li, “Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel,” Science, vol. 311, no. 5761, pp. 622–627, 2006.

T. M. Sager, C. Kommineni, and V. Castranova, “Pulmonary response to intratracheal instillation of ultrafine versus fine titanium dioxide: role of particle surface area,” Particle and Fibre Toxicology, vol. 5, article 17, 2008.

ILSI Workshop, “The relevance of the rat lung response to particle overload for human risk assessment: a workshop consensus report,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 12, no. 1-2, pp. 1–17, 2000.

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health), “NIOSH pocket guide to chemical hazards and other databases,” Publication No. 2002-140, US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH), Cincinnati, Ohio, USA, 2002.

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health), “Occupational exposure to titanium dioxide,” Publication No. 2011-160, US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH), Cincinnati, Ohio, USA, 2011.

ACGIH, Industrial Ventilation: A Manual of Recommended Practice, American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygenists, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA, 24th edition, 2001.

WHO (World Health Organization), Titanium Dioxide. EHC 24, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1982.

T. Jin, M. Berlin, et al., “Titanium,” in Handbook of the Toxicology of Metals, G. F. Nordberg, B. A. Fowler, M. Nordberg, and L. T. Friberg, Eds., Elsevier, 3rd edition, 2007.

Q. Rahman, M. Lohani, E. Dopp et al., “Evidence that ultrafine titanium dioxide induces micronuclei and apoptosis in Syrian hamster embryo fibroblasts,” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 110, no. 8, pp. 797–800, 2002.

M. Hedenborg, “Titanium dioxide induced chemiluminescence of human polymorphonuclear leukocytes,” International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, vol. 61, no. 1-2, pp. 1–6, 1988.

Y. Duan, J. Liu, L. Ma et al., “Toxicological characteristics of nanoparticulate anatase titanium dioxide in mice,” Biomaterials, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 894–899, 2010.

J. Chen, X. Dong, J. Zhao, and G. Tang, “In vivo acute toxicity of titanium dioxide nanoparticles to mice after intraperitioneal injection,” Journal of Applied Toxicology, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 330–337, 2009.

T. Morishige, Y. Yoshioka, A. Tanabe et al., “Titanium dioxide induces different levels of IL-1β production dependent on its particle characteristics through caspase-1 activation mediated by reactive oxygen species and cathepsin B,” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, vol. 392, no. 2, pp. 160–165, 2010.

J. L. Chen and W. E. Fayerweather, “Epidemiologic study of workers exposed to titanium dioxide,” Journal of Occupational Medicine, vol. 30, no. 12, pp. 937–942, 1988.

B. K. Bernard, M. R. Osheroff, A. Hofmann, and J. H. Mennear, “Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of dietary titanium dioxide-coated mica in male and female Fischer 344 rats,” Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 417–429, 1990.

G. A. Hart and T. W. Hesterberg, “In vitro toxicity of respirable-size particles of diatomaceous earth and crystalline silica compared with asbestos and titanium dioxide,” Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 29–42, 1998.

S. J. Kang, B. M. Kim, Y. J. Lee, and H. W. Chung, “Titanium dioxide nanoparticles trigger p53-mediated damage response in peripheral blood lymphocytes,” Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 399–405, 2008.

IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer), “Titanium dioxide group 2B,” in IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, vol. 9, International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization, Lyon, France, 2006.

IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer), “Carbon black, titanium dioxide, and talc,” in IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, vol. 93, International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization, Lyon, France, 2010.

G. Liang, Y. Pu, L. Yin et al., “Influence of different sizes of titanium dioxide nanoparticles on hepatic and renal functions in rats with correlation to oxidative stress,” Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health. Part A, vol. 72, no. 11, pp. 740–745, 2009.

J. Wang, C. Chen, Y. Liu et al., “Potential neurological lesion after nasal instillation of TiO₂ nanoparticles in the anatase and rutile crystal phases,” Toxicology Letters, vol. 183, no. 1–3, pp. 72–80, 2008.

W. S. Cho, R. Duffn, C. A. Poland et al., “Metal oxide nanoparticles induce unique infammatory footprints in the lung: important implications for nanoparticle testing,” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 118, no. 12, pp. 1699–1706, 2010.

I. Iavicoli, V. Leso, L. Fontana, and A. Bergamaschi, “Toxicological effects of titanium dioxide nanoparticles: a review of in vitro mammalian studies,” European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 481–508, 2011.

C. M. Sayes, K. L. Reed, and D. B. Warheit, “Assessing toxicology of fine and nanoparticles: comparing in vitro measurements to in vivo pulmonary toxicity profiles,” Toxicological Sciences, vol. 97, no. 1, pp. 163–180, 2007.

J. Li, Q. Li, J. Xu et al., “Comparative study on the acute pulmonary toxicity induced by 3 and 20 nm TiO₂ primary particles in mice,” Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 239–244, 2007.

R. Liu, L. Yin, Y. Pu et al., “Pulmonary toxicity induced by three forms of titanium dioxide nanoparticles via intra-tracheal instillation in rats,” Progress in Natural Science, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 573–579, 2009.

R. F. Hamilton Jr., N. Wu, D. Porter, M. Buford, M. Wolfarth, and A. Holian, “Particle length-dependent titanium dioxide nanomaterials toxicity and bioactivity,” Particle and Fibre Toxicology, vol. 6, article 35, 2009.

N. Kobayashi, M. Naya, S. Endoh, J. Maru, K. Yamamoto, and J. Nakanishi, “Comparative pulmonary toxicity study of nano-TiO₂ particles of different sizes and agglomerations in rats: different short- and long-term post-instillation results,” Toxicology, vol. 264, no. 1-2, pp. 110–118, 2009.

D. B. Warheit, T. R. Webb, C. M. Sayes, V. L. Colvin, and K. L. Reed, “Pulmonary instillation studies with nanoscale TiO₂ rods and dots in rats: toxicity is not dependent upon particle size and surface area,” Toxicological Sciences, vol. 91, no. 1, pp. 227–236, 2006.

M. Tang, T. Zhang, Y. Xue et al., “Metabonomic studies of biochemical changes in the serum of rats by intratracheally instilled TiO₂ nanoparticles,” Journal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 3065–3074, 2011.

V. H. Grassian, P. T. O'Shaughnessy, A. Adamcakova-Dodd, J. M. Pettibone, and P. S. Thorne, “Inhalation exposure study of titanium dioxide nanoparticles with a primary particle size of 2 to 5 nm,” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 115, no. 3, pp. 397–402, 2007.

H. W. Chen, S. F. Su, C. T. Chien et al., “Titanium dioxide nanoparticles induce emphysema-like lung injury in mice,” The FASEB Journal, vol. 20, no. 13, pp. 2393–2395, 2006.

A. Nemmar, K. Melghit, and B. H. Ali, “The acute proinflammatory and prothrombotic effects of pulmonary exposure to rutile TiO₂ nanorods in rats,” Experimental Biology and Medicine, vol. 233, no. 5, pp. 610–619, 2008.

D. B. Warheit, R. A. Hoke, C. Finlay, E. M. Donner, K. L. Reed, and C. M. Sayes, “Development of a base set of toxicity tests using ultrafine TiO₂ particles as a component of nanoparticle risk management,” Toxicology Letters, vol. 171, no. 3, pp. 99–110, 2007.

D. B. Warheit, T. R. Webb, K. L. Reed, S. Frerichs, and C. M. Sayes, “Pulmonary toxicity study in rats with three forms of ultrafine-TiO₂ particles: differential responses related to surface properties,” Toxicology, vol. 230, no. 1, pp. 90–104, 2007.

Y. Morimoto, T. Oyabu, A. Ogami et al., “Investigation of gene expression of MMP-2 and TIMP-2 mRNA in rat lung in inhaled nickel oxide and titanium dioxide nanoparticles,” Industrial Health, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 344–352, 2011.

C. Moon, H. J. Park, Y. H. Choi, E. M. Park, V. Castranova, and J. L. Kang, “Pulmonary inflammation after intraperitoneal administration of ultrafine titanium dioxide (TiO₂) at rest or in lungs primed with lipopolysaccharide,” Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A, vol. 73, no. 5-6, pp. 396–409, 2010.

A. Gustafsson, E. Lindstedt, L. S. Elfsmark, and A. Bucht, “Lung exposure of titanium dioxide nanoparticles induces innate immune activation and long-lasting lymphocyte response in the Dark Agouti rat,” Journal of Immunotoxicology, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 111–121, 2011.

E. Bermudez, J. B. Mangum, B. A. Wong et al., “Pulmonary responses of mice, rats, and hamsters to subchronic inhalation of ultrafine titanium dioxide particles,” Toxicological Sciences, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 347–357, 2004.

J. I. Everitt, J. B. Mangum, E. Bermudez et al., “Comparison of selected pulmonary responses of rats, mice, and Syrian golden hamsters to inhaled pigmentary titanium dioxide,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 275–282, 2000.

E. Bermudez, J. B. Mangum, B. Asgharian et al., “Long-term pulmonary responses of three laboratory rodent species to subchronic inhalation of pigmentary titanium dioxide particles,” Toxicological Sciences, vol. 70, no. 1, pp. 86–97, 2002.

S. Takenaka, H. Dornhofer-Takenaka, and H. Muhle, “Alveolar distribution of fly ash and of titanium dioxide after long-term inhalation by Wistar rats,” Journal of Aerosol Science, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 361–364, 1986.

J. Ferin, G. Oberdörster, and D. P. Penney, “Pulmonary retention of ultrafine and fine particles in rats,” American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 535–542, 1992.

G. Oberdörster, J. Ferin, R. Gelein, S. C. Soderholm, and J. Finkelstein, “Role of the alveolar macrophage in lung injury: studies with ultrafine particles,” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 97, pp. 193–199, 1992.

G. Oberdörster, J. Ferin, and B. E. Lehnert, “Correlation between particle size, in vivo particle persistence, and lung injury,” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 102, supplement 5, pp. 173–179, 1994.

U. Heinreich, R. Fuhst, S. Rittinghause, et al., “Chronic inhalation exposure of Wistar rats and two different strains of mice to diesel engine exhaust, carbon black and titanium dioxide,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 7, pp. 533–556, 1995.

R. B. Baggs, J. Ferin, and G. Oberdörster, “Regression of pulmonary lesions produced by inhaled titanium dioxide in rats,” Veterinary Pathology, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 592–597, 1997.

Q. Zhang, Y. Kusaka, K. Sato, K. Nakakuki, N. Kohyama, and K. Donaldson, “Differences in the extent of inflammation caused by intratracheal exposure to three ultrafine metals: role of free radicals,” Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A, vol. 53, no. 6, pp. 423–438, 1998.

F. Afaq, P. Abidi, R. Matin, and Q. Rahman, “Cytotoxicity, pro-oxidant effects and antioxidant depletion in rat lung alveolar macrophages exposed to ultrafine titanium dioxide,” Journal of Applied Toxicology, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 307–312, 1998.

G. Oberdörster, J. N. Finkelstein, C. Johnston et al., “Acute pulmonary effects of ultrafine particles in rats and mice,” Research report (Health Effects Institute), no. 96, pp. 5–75, 2000.

D. Höhr, Y. Steinfartz, R. P. F. Schins et al., “The surface area rather than the surface coating determines the acute inflammatory response after instillation of fine and ultrafine TiO₂ in the rat,” International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, vol. 205, no. 3, pp. 239–244, 2002.

L. C. Renwick, D. Brown, A. Clouter, and K. Donaldson, “Increased inflammation and altered macrophage chemotactic responses caused by two ultrafine particle types,” Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 442–447, 2004.

M. Geiser, B. Rothen-Rutishauser, N. Kapp et al., “Ultrafine particles cross cellular membranes by nonphagocytic mechanisms in lungs and in cultured cells,” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 113, no. 11, pp. 1555–1560, 2005.

C. Mühlfeld, M. Geiser, N. Kapp, P. Gehr, and B. Rothen-Rutishauser, “Re-evaluation of pulmonary titanium dioxide nanoparticle distribution using the “relative deposition index”: evidence for clearance through microvasculature,” Particle and Fibre Toxicology, vol. 4, article 7, 2007.

S. T. Larsen, M. Roursgaard, K. A. Jensen, and G. D. Nielsen, “Nano titanium dioxide particles promote allergic sensitization and lung inflammation in mice,” Basic and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, vol. 106, no. 2, pp. 114–117, 2010.

B. van Ravenzwaay, R. Landsiedel, E. Fabian, S. Burkhardt, V. Strauss, and L. Ma-Hock, “Comparing fate and effects of three particles of different surface properties: nano-TiO₂, pigmentary TiO₂ and quartz,” Toxicology Letters, vol. 186, no. 3, pp. 152–159, 2009.

L. Ma-Hock, S. Burkhardt, V. Strauss et al., “Development of a short-term inhalation test in the rat using nano-titanium dioxide as a model substance,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 102–118, 2009.

T. M. Sager and V. Castranova, “Surface area of particle administered versus mass in determining the pulmonary toxicity of ultrafine and fine carbon black: comparison to ultrafine titanium dioxide,” Particle and Fibre Toxicology, vol. 6, article 15, 2009.

E. J. Park, J. Yoon, K. Choi, J. Yi, and K. Park, “Induction of chronic inflammation in mice treated with titanium dioxide nanoparticles by intratracheal instillation,” Toxicology, vol. 260, no. 1–3, pp. 37–46, 2009.

E. M. Rossi, L. Pylkkänen, A. J. Koivisto et al., “Airway exposure to silica-coated TiO₂ nanoparticles induces pulmonary neutrophilia in mice,” Toxicological Sciences, vol. 113, no. 2, Article ID kfp254, pp. 422–433, 2009.

E. M. Rossi, L. Pylkkänen, A. J. Koivisto et al., “Inhalation exposure to nanosized and fine TiO₂ particles inhibits features of allergic asthma in a murine model,” Particle and Fibre Toxicology, vol. 7, article 35, 2010.

M. Scuri, B. T. Chen, V. Castranova et al., “Effects of titanium dioxide nanoparticle exposure on neuroimmune responses in rat airways,” Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A, vol. 73, no. 20, pp. 1353–1369, 2010.

Y. Li, J. Li, J. Yin et al., “Systematic influence induced by 3 nm titanium dioxide following intratracheal instillation of mice,” Journal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, vol. 10, no. 12, pp. 8544–8549, 2010.

R. Liu, X. Zhang, Y. Pu et al., “Small-sized titanium dioxide nanoparticles mediate immune toxicity in rat pulmonary alveolar macrophages in vivo,” Journal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 5161–5169, 2010.

M. Tang, T. Zhang, Y. Xue et al., “Dose dependent in vivo metabolic characteristics of titanium dioxide nanoparticles,” Journal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, vol. 10, no. 12, pp. 8575–8583, 2010.

M. Leppanen, A. Korpi, M. Miettinen et al., “Nanosized TiO₂ caused minor airflow limitation in the murine airways,” Archives of Toxicology, vol. 85, no. 7, pp. 827–839, 2011.

K. S. Hougaard, P. Jackson, K. A. Jensen et al., “Effects of prenatal exposure to surface-coated nanosized titanium dioxide (UV-Titan). A study in mice,” Particle and Fibre Toxicology, vol. 7, article 16, 2010.

S. Halappanavar, P. Jackson, A. Williams et al., “Pulmonary response to surface-coated nanotitanium dioxide particles includes induction of acute phase response genes, inflammatory cascades, and changes in microRNAs: a toxicogenomic study,” Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 425–439, 2011.

A. Nemmar, K. Melghit, S. Al-Salam et al., “Acute respiratory and systemic toxicity of pulmonary exposure to rutile Fe-doped TiO₂ nanorods,” Toxicology, vol. 279, no. 1–3, pp. 167–175, 2011.

S. Hussain, J. A. J. Vanoirbeek, K. Luyts et al., “Lung exposure to nanoparticles modulates an asthmatic response in a mouse model,” European Respiratory Journal, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 299–309, 2011.

C. L. Tran, R. T. Cullen, D. Buchanan, et al., “Investigation and prediction of pulmonary responses to dust. Part II,” in Investigations into the Pulmonary Effects of Low Toxicity Dusts. Parts I and II, Health and Safety Executive, Sufolk, UK, 1999, Contract Research Report 216.

C. L. Tran, D. Buchanan, R. T. Cullen, A. Searl, A. D. Jones, and K. Donaldson, “Inhalation of poorly soluble particles. II. Influence of particle surface area on inflammation and clearance,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 12, no. 12, pp. 1113–1126, 2000.

C. Monteiller, L. Tran, W. MacNee et al., “The pro-inflammatory effects of low-toxicity low-solubility particles, nanoparticles and fine particles, on epithelial cells in vitro: the role of surface area,” Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 609–615, 2007.

K. Donaldson, D. Brown, A. Clouter et al., “The pulmonary toxicology of ultrafine particles,” Journal of Aerosol Medicine, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 213–220, 2002.

P. E. Morrow, “Possible mechanisms to explain dust overloading of the lungs,” Fundamental and Applied Toxicology, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 369–384, 1988.

G. Oberdörster, “Significance of particle parameters in the evaluation of exposure-dose-response relationships of inhaled particles,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 8, pp. 73–89, 1996.

G. Oberdörster, “Pulmonary effects of inhaled ultrafine particles,” International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, vol. 74, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2001.

F. Pott, G. H. Althoff, M. Roller, D. Hohr, and J. Friemann, “High acute toxicity of hydrophobic ultrafine titantium dioxide in an intratracheal study with several dusts in rats,” in ILSI Monographs Relationship Between Respiratory Disease and Exposure to Air Pollution, U. Mohr and D. L. Dungworth, Eds., pp. 270–277, ILSI Press, Washington, DC, USA, 1998.

R. A. Baan, “Carcinogenic hazards from inhaled carbon black, titanium dioxide, and talc not containing asbestos or asbestiform fibers: recent evaluations by an IARC Monographs Working Group,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 19, supplement 1, pp. 213–228, 2007.

K. P. Lee, H. J. Trochimowicz, and C. F. Reinhardt, “Pulmonary response of rats exposed to titanium dioxide (TiO₂) by inhalation for two years,” Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 179–192, 1985.

J. X. Wang, Y. F. Li, G. Q. Zhou et al., “Influence of intranasal instilled titanium dioxide nanoparticles on monoaminergic neurotransmitters of female mice at different exposure time,” Zhonghua Yu Fang Yi Xue Za Zhi, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 91–95, 2007.

J. Wang, Y. Liu, F. Jiao et al., “Time-dependent translocation and potential impairment on central nervous system by intranasally instilled TiO₂ nanoparticles,” Toxicology, vol. 254, no. 1-2, pp. 82–90, 2008.

L. Ma, J. Liu, N. Li et al., “Oxidative stress in the brain of mice caused by translocated nanoparticulate TiO₂ delivered to the abdominal cavity,” Biomaterials, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 99–105, 2010.

R. Hu, X. Gong, Y. Duan et al., “Neurotoxicological effects and the impairment of spatial recognition memory in mice caused by exposure to TiO₂ nanoparticles,” Biomaterials, vol. 31, no. 31, pp. 8043–8050, 2010.

Y. M. Jeon, S. K. Park, and M. Y. Lee, “Toxicoproteomic identification of TiO₂ nanoparticle-induced protein expression changes in mouse brain,” Animal Cells and Systems, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 107–114, 2011.

T. C. Long, N. Saleh, R. D. Tilton, G. V. Lowry, and B. Veronesi, “Titanium dioxide (P25) produces reactive oxygen species in immortalized brain microglia (BV2): implications for nanoparticle neurotoxicity,” Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 40, no. 14, pp. 4346–4352, 2006.

T. C. Long, J. Tajuba, P. Sama et al., “Nanosize titanium dioxide stimulates reactive oxygen species in brain microglia and damages neurons in vitro,” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 115, no. 11, pp. 1631–1637, 2007.

S. Liu, L. Xu, T. Zhang, G. Ren, and Z. Yang, “Oxidative stress and apoptosis induced by nanosized titanium dioxide in PC12 cells,” Toxicology, vol. 267, no. 1–3, pp. 172–177, 2010.

J. A. Shin, E. J. Lee, S. M. Seo, H. S. Kim, J. L. Kang, and E. M. Park, “Nanosized titanium dioxide enhanced inflammatory responses in the septic brain of mouse,” Neuroscience, vol. 165, no. 2, pp. 445–454, 2010.

K. Yamashita, Y. Yoshioka, K. Higashisaka et al., “Silica and titanium dioxide nanoparticles cause pregnancy complications in mice,” Nature Nanotechnology, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 321–328, 2011.

K. Takeda, K. I. Suzuki, A. Ishihara et al., “Nanoparticles transferred from pregnant mice to their offspring can damage the genital and cranial nerve systems,” Journal of Health Science, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 95–102, 2009.

M. Shimizu, H. Tainaka, T. Oba, K. Mizuo, M. Umezawa, and K. Takeda, “Maternal exposure to nanoparticulate titanium dioxide during the prenatal period alters gene expression related to brain development in the mouse,” Particle and Fibre Toxicology, vol. 6, article 20, 2009.

Y. Takahashi, Y. Shinkai, K. Mizuo, S. Oshio, and K. Takeda, “Prenatal exposure to titanium dioxide nanoparticles increases dopamine levels in the prefrontal cortex and neostriatum of mice,” Journal of Toxicological Sciences, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 749–756, 2010.

N. Sadrieh, A. M. Wokovich, N. V. Gopee et al., “Lack of significant dermal penetration of titanium dioxide from sunscreen formulations containing nano- and submicron-size TiO₂ particles,” Toxicological Sciences, vol. 115, no. 1, pp. 156–166, 2010.

F. Menzel, T. Reinert, J. Vogt, and T. Butz, “Investigations of percutaneous uptake of ultrafine TiO₂ particles at the high-energy ion nanoprobe LIPSION,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Reasearch Section B, vol. 2019, pp. 82–86, 2004.

Zs. Kertész, Z. Szikszai, E. Gontier et al., “Nuclear microprobe study of TiO₂-penetration in the epidermis of human skin xenografts,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B, vol. 231, no. 1–4, pp. 280–285, 2005.

F. Pflücker, V. Wendel, H. Hohenberg et al., “The human stratum corneum layer: an effective barrier against dermal uptake of different forms of topically applied micronised titanium dioxide,” Skin Pharmacology and Applied Skin Physiology, vol. 14, supplement 1, pp. 92–97, 2001.

J. Schulz, H. Hohenberg, F. Pflücker et al., “Distribution of sunscreens on skin,” Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, vol. 54, pp. S157–S163, 2002.

A. Mavon, C. Miquel, O. Lejeune, B. Payre, and P. Moretto, “In vitro percutaneous absorption and in vivo stratum corneum distribution of an organic and a mineral sunscreen,” Skin Pharmacology and Physiology, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 10–20, 2007.

B. Kiss, T. Bíró, G. Czifra et al., “Investigation of micronized titanium dioxide penetration in human skin xenografts and its effect on cellular functions of human skin-derived cells,” Experimental Dermatology, vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 659–667, 2008.

K. Adachi, N. Yamada, K. Yamamoto, Y. Yoshida, and O. Yamamoto, “In vivo effect of industrial titanium dioxide nanoparticles experimentally exposed to hairless rat skin,” Nanotoxicology, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 296–306, 2010.

M. H. Tan, C. A. Commens, L. Burnett, and P. J. Snitch, “A pilot study on the percutaneous absorption of microfine titanium dioxide from sunscreens,” Australasian Journal of Dermatology, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 185–187, 1996.

J. Lademann, H. J. Weigmann, C. Rickmeyer et al., “Penetration of titanium dioxide microparticles in a sunscreen formulation into the horny layer and the follicular orifice,” Skin Pharmacology and Applied Skin Physiology, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 247–256, 1999.

R. Yanagisawa, H. Takano, K. I. Inoue et al., “Titanium dioxide nanoparticles aggravate atopic dermatitis-like skin lesions in NC/Nga mice,” Experimental Biology and Medicine, vol. 234, no. 3, pp. 314–322, 2009.

J. Wu, W. Liu, C. Xue et al., “Toxicity and penetration of TiO₂ nanoparticles in hairless mice and porcine skin after subchronic dermal exposure,” Toxicology Letters, vol. 191, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2009.

E. Y. Moon, G. H. Yi, J. S. Kang, J. S. Lim, H. M. Kim, and S. Pyo, “An increase in mouse tumor growth by an in vivo immunomodulating effect of titanium dioxide nanoparticles,” Journal of Immunotoxicology, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 56–67, 2011.

F. Furukawa, Y. Doi, M. Suguro et al., “Lack of skin carcinogenicity of topically applied titanium dioxide nanoparticles in the mouse,” Food and Chemical Toxicology, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 744–749, 2011.

C. M. Sayes, R. Wahi, P. A. Kurian et al., “Correlating nanoscale titania structure with toxicity: a cytotoxicity and inflammatory response study with human dermal fibroblasts and human lung epithelial cells,” Toxicological Sciences, vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 174–185, 2006.

B. Vileno, M. Lekka, A. Sienkiewicz et al., “Stiffness alterations of single cells induced by UV in the presence of nanoTiO₂,” Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 41, no. 14, pp. 5149–5153, 2007.

C. Y. Jin, B. S. Zhu, X. F. Wang, and Q. H. Lu, “Cytotoxicity of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in mouse fibroblast cells,” Chemical Research in Toxicology, vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 1871–1877, 2008.

J. Wang, G. Zhou, C. Chen et al., “Acute toxicity and biodistribution of different sized titanium dioxide particles in mice after oral administration,” Toxicology Letters, vol. 168, no. 2, pp. 176–185, 2007.

H. Liu, L. Ma, J. Zhao et al., “Biochemical toxicity of nano-anatase TiO₂ particles in mice,” Biological Trace Element Research, vol. 129, no. 1–3, pp. 170–180, 2009.

P. Bihari, M. Holzer, M. Praetner et al., “Single-walled carbon nanotubes activate platelets and accelerate thrombus formation in the microcirculation,” Toxicology, vol. 269, no. 2-3, pp. 148–154, 2010.

T. R. Nurkiewicz, D. W. Porter, A. F. Hubbs et al., “Nanoparticle inhalation augments particle-dependent systemic microvascular dysfunction,” Particle and Fibre Toxicology, vol. 5, article 1, 2008.

T. R. Nurkiewicz, D. W. Porter, A. F. Hubbs et al., “Pulmonary nanoparticle exposure disrupts systemic microvascular nitric oxide signaling,” Toxicological Sciences, vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 191–203, 2009.

A. J. LeBlanc, J. L. Cumpston, B. T. Chen, D. Frazer, V. Castranova, and T. R. Nurkiewicz, “Nanoparticle inhalation impairs endothelium-dependent vasodilation in subepicardial arterioles,” Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A, vol. 72, no. 24, pp. 1576–1584, 2009.

A. J. LeBlanc, A. M. Moseley, B. T. Chen, D. Frazer, V. Castranova, and T. R. Nurkiewicz, “Nanoparticle inhalation impairs coronary microvascular reactivity via a local reactive oxygen species-dependent mechanism,” Cardiovascular Toxicology, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 27–36, 2010.

A. Courtois, P. Andujar, Y. Ladeiro et al., “Effect of engineered nanoparticles on vasomotor responses in rat intrapulmonary artery,” Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, vol. 245, no. 2, pp. 203–210, 2010.

Q. Bu, G. Yan, P. Deng et al., “NMR-based metabonomic study of the sub-acute toxicity of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in rats after oral administration,” Nanotechnology, vol. 21, no. 12, Article ID 125105, 2010.

A. Courtois, P. Andujar, Y. Ladeiro et al., “Impairment of NO-dependent relaxation in intralobar pulmonary arteries: comparison of urban particulate matter and manufactured nanoparticles,” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 116, no. 10, pp. 1294–1299, 2008.

L. L. Guo, X. H. Liu, D. X. Qin et al., “Effects of nanosized titanium dioxide on the reproductive system of male mice,” Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 517–522, 2009.

L. Ma, J. Zhao, J. Wang et al., “The acute liver injury in mice caused by nano-anatase TiO₂,” Nanoscale Research Letters, vol. 4, no. 11, pp. 1275–1285, 2009.

Y. Cui, H. Liu, M. Zhou et al., “Signaling pathway of inflammatory responses in the mouse liver caused by TiO₂ nanoparticles,” Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, vol. 96, no. 1, pp. 221–229, 2011.

J. X. Wang, Y. B. Fan, Y. Gao, Q. H. Hu, and T. C. Wang, “TiO₂ nanoparticles translocation and potential toxicological effect in rats after intraarticular injection,” Biomaterials, vol. 30, no. 27, pp. 4590–4600, 2009.

H. Liu, L. Ma, J. Liu, J. Zhao, J. Yan, and F. Hong, “Toxicity of nano-anatase TiO₂ to mice: liver injury, oxidative stress,” Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry, vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 175–186, 2010.

Y. Cui, X. Gong, Y. Duan et al., “Hepatocyte apoptosis and its molecular mechanisms in mice caused by titanium dioxide nanoparticles,” Journal of Hazardous Materials, vol. 183, no. 1–3, pp. 874–880, 2010.

N. Li, L. Ma, J. Wang et al., “Interaction between nano-anatase TiO₂ and liver DNA from mice in vivo,” Nanoscale Research Letters, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 108–115, 2010.

E. Fabian, R. Landsiedel, L. Ma-Hock, K. Wiench, W. Wohlleben, and B. van Ravenzwaay, “Tissue distribution and toxicity of intravenously administered titanium dioxide nanoparticles in rats,” Archives of Toxicology, vol. 82, no. 3, pp. 151–157, 2008.

Y. Shi, J. H. Zhang, M. Jiang, L. H. Zhu, H. Q. Tan, and B. Lu, “Synergistic genotoxicity caused by low concentration of titanium dioxide nanoparticles and p,p′-DDT in human hepatocytes,” Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 192–204, 2010.

N. Li, Y. Duan, M. Hong et al., “Spleen injury and apoptotic pathway in mice caused by titanium dioxide nanoparticules,” Toxicology Letters, vol. 195, no. 2-3, pp. 161–168, 2010.

J. Wang, N. Li, L. Zheng et al., “P38-Nrf-2 signaling pathway of oxidative stress in mice caused by nanoparticulate TiO₂,” Biological Trace Element Research, vol. 140, no. 2, pp. 186–197, 2011.

J. F. Zhao, N. Li, S. S. Wangy et al., “The mechanism of oxidative damage in the nephrotoxicity of mice caused by nano-anatase TiO₂,” Journal of Experimental Nanoscience, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 447–462, 2010.

T. Hansen, G. Clermont, A. Alves et al., “Biological tolerance of different materials in bulk and nanoparticulate form in a rat model: sarcoma development by nanoparticles,” Journal of the Royal Society Interface, vol. 3, no. 11, pp. 767–775, 2006.

A. M. Gatti, J. Kirkpatrick, A. Gambarelli et al., “ESEM evaluations of muscle/nanoparticles interface in a rat model,” Journal of Materials Science. Materials in Medicine, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1515–1522, 2008.

K. Onuma, Y. Sato, S. Ogawara et al., “Nano-scaled particles of titanium dioxide convert benign mouse fibrosarcoma cells into aggressive tumor cells,” American Journal of Pathology, vol. 175, no. 5, pp. 2171–2183, 2009.

M. Ema, N. Kobayashi, M. Naya, S. Hanai, and J. Nakanishi, “Reproductive and developmental toxicity studies of manufactured nanomaterials,” Reproductive Toxicology, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 343–352, 2010.

B. Rehn, F. Seiler, S. Rehn, J. Bruch, and M. Maier, “Investigations on the inflammatory and genotoxic lung effects of two types of titanium dioxide: untreated and surface treated,” Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, vol. 189, no. 2, pp. 84–95, 2003.

B. Trouiller, R. Reliene, A. Westbrook, P. Solaimani, and R. H. Schiestl, “Titanium dioxide nanoparticles induce DNA damage and genetic instability in vivo in mice,” Cancer Research, vol. 69, no. 22, pp. 8784–8789, 2009.

S. Lu, R. Duffin, C. Poland et al., “Efficacy of simple short-term in vitro assays for predicting the potential of metal oxide nanoparticles to cause pulmonary inflammation,” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 117, no. 2, pp. 241–247, 2009.

A. E. Nel, L. Mädler, D. Velegol et al., “Understanding biophysicochemical interactions at the nano-bio interface,” Nature Materials, vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 543–557, 2009.

K. Donaldson, V. Stone, C. L. Tran, W. Kreyling, and P. J. A. Borm, “Nanotoxicology,” Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 61, no. 9, pp. 727–728, 2004.

M. D. Newman, M. Stotland, and J. I. Ellis, “The safety of nanosized particles in titanium dioxide and zinc oxide-based sunscreens,” Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 685–692, 2009.

E. J. Jung, N. K. Avliyakulov, P. Boontheung, J. A. Loo, and A. E. Nel, “Pro-oxidative DEP chemicals induce heat shock proteins and an unfolding protein response in a bronchial epithelial cell line as determined by DIGE analysis,” Proteomics, vol. 7, no. 21, pp. 3906–3918, 2007.

G. G. Xiao, M. Wang, N. Li, J. A. Loo, and A. E. Nel, “Use of proteomics to demonstrate a hierarchical oxidative stress response to diesel exhaust particle chemicals in a macrophage cell line,” The Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 278, no. 50, pp. 50781–50790, 2003.

L. Zhang, M. Wang, X. Kang et al., “Oxidative stress and asthma: proteome analysis of chitinase-like proteins and FIZZ1 in lung tissue and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid,” Journal of Proteome Research, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1631–1638, 2009.

A. M. Knaapen, P. J. A. Borm, C. Albrecht, and R. P. F. Schins, “Inhaled particles and lung cancer. Part A: mechanisms,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 109, no. 6, pp. 799–809, 2004.

F. Tao and L. Kobzik, “Lung macrophage-epithelial cell interactions amplify particle-mediated cytokine release,” American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 499–505, 2002.

P. Thevenot, J. Cho, D. Wavhal, R. B. Timmons, and L. Tang, “Surface chemistry influences cancer killing effect of TiO₂ nanoparticles,” Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology, and Medicine, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 226–236, 2008.

K. Donaldson, P. J. A. Borm, G. Oberdorster, K. E. Pinkerton, V. Stone, and C. L. Tran, “Concordance between in vitro and in vivo dosimetry in the proinflammatory effects of low-toxicity, low-solubility particles: the key role of the proximal alveolar region,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 53–62, 2008.

R. Duffin, L. Tran, D. Brown, V. Stone, and K. Donaldson, “Proinflammogenic effects of low-toxicity and metal nanoparticles in vivo and in vitro: highlighting the role of particle surface area and surface reactivity,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 849–856, 2007.

P. A. Schulte, M. K. Schubauer-Berigan, C. Mayweather, C. L. Geraci, R. Zumwalde, and J. L. McKernan, “Issues in the development of epidemiologic studies of workers exposed to engineered nanoparticles,” Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 323–335, 2009.

G. Oberdörster, “Safety assessment for nanotechnology and nanomedicine: concepts of nanotoxicology,” Journal of Internal Medicine, vol. 267, no. 1, pp. 89–105, 2010.

P. A. Schulte and D. B. Trout, “Nanomaterials and worker health: medical surveillance, exposure registries, and epidemiologic research,” Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 53, supplement 6, pp. S3–S7, 2011.

E. K. Rushton, J. Jiang, S. S. Leonard et al., “Concept of assessing nanoparticle hazards considering nanoparticle dosemetric and chemical/biological response metrics,” Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A, vol. 73, no. 5-6, pp. 445–461, 2010.

G. Oberdörster, A. Elder, and A. Rinderknecht, “Nanoparticles and the brain: cause for concern?” Journal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 4996–5007, 2009.

Healthand Safety Executive, Horizon Scanning Intelligence Group: Update on Nanotechnology. 2006, http://www.hse.gov.uk/nanotechnology/sr002p1.pdf

Australian Safety andCompensation Council, A review of the potential occupational safety and health implications of nanotechnology, 2006, http://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/AboutSafeWorkAustralia/WhatWeDo/Publications/Documents/103/Review_PotentialOHSImplications_Nanotechnology_2006_ArchivePDF.pdf

British Standards Institute, Guide to safe handling and disposal of manufactured nanomaterials, 2007, http://www.bsigroup.com/en/sectorsandservices/Forms/PD-6699-2/Download-PD6699-2-2007/

R. Drew, J. Frangos, and T. Hagen, Engineered Nanoparticles: A Review of the Toxicology and Health Hazards, Australian Safety and Compensation Council, Canberra, Australia, 2009.

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health), “Approaches to safe nanotechnology: an information exchange with NIOSH,” Publication No. 2009-125, US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH), Cincinnati, Ohio, USA, 2009.

M. van Zijverden and A. J. A. M. Sips, “Nanotechnology in perspective,” RIVM Report No. 601778003, 2009.

Institut de RechercheRobert-Sauve en Sante du Travail, Nanoparticles: Actual Knowledge About Occupational Health and Safety Risks and Prevention Measures, http://www.irsst.qc.ca/media/documents/pubirsst/r-470.pdf

K. D. Grieger, S. F. Hansen, and A. Baun, “The known unknowns of nanomaterials: describing and characterizing uncertainty within environmental, health and safety risks,” Nanotoxicology, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 222–233, 2009.

D. Brouwer, “Exposure to manufactured nanoparticles in different workplaces,” Toxicology, vol. 269, no. 2-3, pp. 120–127, 2010.

V. Murashov, “Human and environmental exposure assessment for nanomaterials: an introduction to this issue,” International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 363–364, 2010.

S. R. Woskie, D. Bello, M. A. Virji, and A. B. Stefaniak, “Understanding workplace processes and factors that influence exposures to engineered nanomaterials,” International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 365–377, 2010.

S. Plitzko, “Workplace exposure to engineered nanoparticles,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 25–29, 2009.

D. Brouwer, B. van Duuren-Stuurman, M. Berges, E. Jankowska, D. Bard, and D. Mark, “From workplace air measurement results toward estimates of exposure? Development of a strategy to assess exposure to manufactured nano-objects,” Journal of Nanoparticle Research, vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 1867–1881, 2009.

J. H. Lee, S. B. Lee, G. N. Bae et al., “Exposure assessment of carbon nanotube manufacturing workplaces,” Inhalation Toxicology, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 369–381, 2010.

M. Methner, L. Hodson, A. Dames, and C. Geraci, “Nanoparticle Emission Assessment Technique (NEAT) for the identification and measurement of potential inhalation exposure to engineered nanomaterials—Part B: results from 12 field studies,” Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 163–176, 2010.