Search results

Abstract
The prevalent application of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) has led to an extensive effort to develop tools facilitating their risk assessment and management. This interlaboratory trial (encompassing two laboratories) sought to investigate the genotoxic impact of ENMs using the hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase (HPRT) forward mutation assay and in vitro cytokinesis-blocked micronucleus (CBMN) assay, utilising harmonised protocols. In the CBMN assay, human lymphoblast (TK6) cells were exposed to zinc oxide (ZnO), titanium dioxide (TiO2) and tungsten carbide-cobalt (WC/Co) for 24-hours after which 1000 binucleated cells were scored for micronuclei (n=2). For the HPRT assay, TK6 and mouse fibroblast (V79) cells were exposed to ZnO, TiO2, WC/Co, CuO and Nanocyl-CNTs for 24-hours after which 600 wells were scored for point mutations (n=2). Significant cytotoxicity and micronuclei frequency was reported following ZnO exposure (20µg/ml). Significant micronuclei induction was reported following WC/Co exposures (2-fold over control, 100µg/ml). No significant mutagenicity was detected with ZnO or TiO2; both laboratories observed significant cytotoxicity following exposure to ZnO (20µg/ml; 37% reduction in cell viability). In the second interlaboratory trial CuO induced significant cytotoxicity (36% reduction in viability: 0.5µg/ml), and a 32-fold increase in mutagenicity. The Nanocyl induced a 6-fold increase in mutagenicity. The data generated here has shown good statistical concordance between laboratories and has highlighted a promising route forward in supporting risk decision making for ENMs. The authors would like to acknowledge this research has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program for the RiskGONE project, grant agreement #814425.

Nanotechnologies have reached maturity and market penetration that require nano‐specific changes in legislation and harmonization among legislation domains, such as the amendments to REACH for nanomaterials (NMs) which came into force in 2020. Thus, an assessment of the components and regulatory boundaries of NMs risk governance is timely, alongside related methods and tools, as part of the global efforts to optimise nanosafety and integrate it into product design processes, via Safe(r)‐by‐Design (SbD) concepts. This paper provides an overview of the state‐of‐the‐art regarding risk governance of NMs and lays out the theoretical basis for the development and implementation of an effective, trustworthy and transparent risk governance framework for NMs. The proposed framework enables continuous integration of the evolving state of the science, leverages best practice from contiguous disciplines and facilitates responsive re‐thinking of nanosafety governance to meet future needs. To achieve and operationalise such framework, a science‐based Risk Governance Council (RGC) for NMs is being developed. The framework will provide a toolkit for independent NMs' risk governance and integrates needs and views of stakeholders. An extension of this framework to relevant advanced materials and emerging technologies is also envisaged, in view of future foundations of risk research in Europe and globally. ; This study received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No 814425 (RiskGONE) and No 814572 (NanoSolveIT). ; Peer reviewed