Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp 1911–1920 | Cite as

The size-dependent genotoxicity and oxidative stress of silica nanoparticles on endothelial cells

  • Furong Zhou
  • Fen Liao
  • Lingying Chen
  • Yuanfeng Liu
  • Wuxiang Wang
  • Shaolong FengEmail author
Research Article
  • 69 Downloads

Abstract

Concerns over the health risk of the widely distributed, commonly used silica nanoparticles (SiNPs) are increasing worldwide. Yet, up to now, there are still many major knowledge gaps over the potential adverse effects of SiNP exposure on human cardiovascular health and the underlying mechanisms. In this study, comet assay and micronucleus test were employed to determine the genotoxic potentials of four sizes (10, 25, 50, 100 nm) of SiNPs to human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) in culture. The intracellular redox statuses were explored through the determination of the levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reduced glutathione (GSH) with kits, respectively. The protein levels of nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) were also detected by Western blot. The results showed that at the administrative levels (1, 5, 25 μg/mL), all the four sizes of SiNPs could induce an increase of both DNA damages and MN frequencies in HUVECs in culture, with a positive dose- and negative size-dependent effect relationship (S100 < S50 < S25 < S10). Also, significantly enhanced levels of intracellular ROS, but decreased levels of GSH, were observed in the SiNP-treated groups. Interestingly, a very similar manner of dose- and size-dependent effect relationship was observed between the ROS test and both comet assay and MN test, but contrary to that of GSH assay. Correspondingly, the levels of Nrf2 protein were also enhanced in the SiNP-treated HUVECs, with a negative size-dependent effect relationship. These results implicated that induction of oxidative stress and subsequent genotoxicity may be an important biological mechanism by which SiNP exposure may affect human cardiovascular health.

Keywords

Silica nanoparticle (SiNP) Endothelial cell (EC) Genotoxicity Oxidative stress 

Notes

Funding information

This paper was funded by the Science and Technology Foundation of Guangdong Province (2014B030301060) and the Foundation of University of South China, China (2012XQD44).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Albanese A, Chan WC (2011) Effect of gold nanoparticle aggregation on cell uptake and toxicity. ACS Nano 5:5478–5489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bolognesi C (2003) Genotoxicity of pesticides: a review of human biomonitoring studies. Mutat Res 543:251–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonetti PO, Lerman LO, Lerman A (2003) Endothelial dysfunction: a marker of atherosclerotic risk. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 23:168–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bostan HB, Rezaee R, Valokala MG, Tsarouhas K, Golokhvast K, Tsatsakis AM, Karimi G (2016) Cardiotoxicity of nano-particles. Life Sci 165:91–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cervelli T, Borghini A, Galli A, Andreassi MG (2012) DNA damage and repair in atherosclerosis: current insights and future perspectives. Int J Mol Sci 13:16929–16944CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Claxton LD, Houk VS, Hughes TJ (1998) Genotoxicity of industrial wastes and effluents. Mutat Res 410:237–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Davignon J, Ganz P (2004) Role of endothelial dysfunction in atherosclerosis. Circulation 109:III27–III32Google Scholar
  8. Du Z, Zhao D, Jing L, Cui G, Jin M, Li Y, Liu X, Liu Y, Du H, Guo C, Zhou X, Sun Z (2013) Cardiovascular toxicity of different sizes amorphous silica nanoparticles in rats after intratracheal instillation. Cardiovasc Toxicol 13:194–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Duan J, Yu Y, Li Y, Li Y, Liu H, Jing L, Yang M, Wang J, Li C, Sun Z (2016) Low-dose exposure of silica nanoparticles induces cardiac dysfunction via neutrophil-mediated inflammation and cardiac contraction in zebrafish embryos. Nanotoxicology 10:575–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fenech M (2007) Cytokinesis-block micronucleus cytome assay. Nat Protoc 2:1084–1104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Feng S, Kong Z, Wang X, Peng P, Zeng EY (2005) Assessing the genotoxicity of imidacloprid and RH-5849 in human peripheral blood lymphocytes in vitro with comet assay and cytogenetic tests. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 61:239–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gong C, Tao G, Yang L, Liu J, He H, Zhuang Z (2012) The role of reactive oxygen species in silicon dioxide nanoparticle-induced cytotoxicity and DNA damage in HaCaT cells. Mol Biol Rep 39:4915–4925CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hansen SF, Michelson ES, Kamper A, Borling P, Stuer-Lauridsen F, Baun A (2008) Categorization framework to aid exposure assessment of nanomaterials in consumer products. Ecotoxicology 17:438–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Holmstrom KM, Finkel T (2014) Cellular mechanisms and physiological consequences of redox-dependent signalling. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 15:411–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hussain S, Vanoirbeek JA, Hoet PH (2012) Interactions of nanomaterials with the immune system Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomed Nanobiotechnol 4:169–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ishida T, Ishida M, Tashiro S, Yoshizumi M, Kihara Y (2014) Role of DNA damage in cardiovascular disease. Circ J 78:42–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jimenez-Villarreal J, Rivas-Armendariz DI, Arellano Perez-Vertti RD, Olivas Calderon E, Garcia-Garza R, Betancourt-Martinez ND, Serrano-Gallardo LB, Moran-Martinez J (2017) Relationship between lymphocyte DNA fragmentation and dose of iron oxide (Fe2O3) and silicon oxide (SiO2) nanoparticles. Genet Mol Res 16(1):1–12Google Scholar
  18. Keller AA, McFerran S, Lazareva A, Suh S (2013) Global life cycle releases of engineered nanomaterials. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 15(6): 1–17Google Scholar
  19. Kermanizadeh A, Balharry D, Wallin H, Loft S, Moller P (2015) Nanomaterial translocation-the biokinetics, tissue accumulation, toxicity and fate of materials in secondary organs-a review. Crit Rev Toxicol 45:837–872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kim JS, Yoon TJ, Yu KN, Kim BG, Park SJ, Kim HW, Lee KH, Park SB, Lee JK, Cho MH (2006) Toxicity and tissue distribution of magnetic nanoparticles in mice. Toxicol Sci 89:338–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kumar R, Roy I, Ohulchanskky TY, Vathy LA, Bergey EJ, Sajjad M, Prasad PN (2010) In vivo biodistribution and clearance studies using multimodal organically modified silica nanoparticles. ACS Nano 4:699–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kwon JY, Kim HL, Lee JY, Ju YH, Kim JS, Kang SH, Kim YR, Lee JK, Jeong J, Kim MK, Maeng EH, Seo YR (2014) Undetactable levels of genotoxicity of SiO2 nanoparticles in in vitro and in vivo tests. Int J Nanomedicine 9(Suppl 2):173–181Google Scholar
  23. Kyrtopoulos SA, Georgiadis P, Autrup H, Demopoulos N, Farmer P, Haugen A, Katsouyanni K, Lambert B, Ovrebo S, Sram R, Stefanou G, Topinka J (2001) Biomarkers of genotoxicity of urban air pollution overview and descriptive data from a molecular epidemiology study on populations exposed to moderate-to-low levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: the AULIS project. Mutat Res 496:207–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. LeBlanc AJ, Moseley AM, Chen BT, Frazer D, Castranova V, Nurkiewicz TR (2010) Nanoparticle inhalation impairs coronary microvascular reactivity via a local reactive oxygen species-dependent mechanism. Cardiovasc Toxicol 10:27–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li JJ, Muralikrishnan S, Ng CT, Yung LY, Bay BH (2010) Nanoparticle-induced pulmonary toxicity. Exp Biol Med 235:1025–1033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Malfatti MA, Palko HA, Kuhn EA, Turteltaub KW (2012) Determining the pharmacokinetics and long-term biodistribution of SiO2 nanoparticles in vivo using accelerator mass spectrometry. Nano Lett 12:5532–5538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Manke A, Wang L, Rojanasakul Y (2013) Mechanisms of nanoparticle-induced oxidative stress and toxicity. Biomed Res Int 2013:942916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nabeshi H, Yoshikawa T, Matsuyama K, Nakazato Y, Matsuo K, Arimori A, Isobe M, Tochigi S, Kondoh S, Hirai T, Akase T, Yamashita T, Yamashita K, Yoshida T, Nagano K, Abe Y, Yoshioka Y, Kamada H, Imazawa T, Itoh N, Nakagawa S, Mayumi T, Tsunoda SI, Tsutsumi Y (2011) Systemic distribution, nuclear entry and cytotoxicity of amorphous nanosilica following topical application. Biomaterials 32:2713–2724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nemmar A, Holme JA, Rosas I, Schwarze PE, Alfaro-Moreno E (2013) Recent advances in particulate matter and nanoparticle toxicology: a review of the in vivo and in vitro studies. Biomed Res Int 2013:279371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nemmar A, Yuvaraju P, Beegam S, Yasin J, Kazzam EE, Ali BH (2016) Oxidative stress, inflammation, and DNA damage in multiple organs of mice acutely exposed to amorphous silica nanoparticles. Int J Nanomed 11:919–928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Oostingh GJ, Casals E, Italiani P, Colognato R, Stritzinger R, Ponti J, Pfaller T, Kohl Y, Ooms D, Favilli F, Leppens H, Lucchesi D, Rossi F, Nelissen I, Thielecke H, Puntes VF, Duschl A, Boraschi D (2011) Problems and challenges in the development and validation of human cell-based assays to determine nanoparticle-induced immunomodulatory effects. Particle and Fibre Toxicol 8:8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rim KT, Song SW, Kim HY (2013) Oxidative DNA damage from nanoparticle exposure and its application to workers' health: a literature review. Safety and Health at Work 4:177–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shah NR, Mahmoudi M (2015) The role of DNA damage and repair in atherosclerosis: a review. J Mol Cell Cardiol 86:147–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shannahan JH, Kodavanti UP, Brown JM (2012) Manufactured and airborne nanoparticle cardiopulmonary interactions: a review of mechanisms and the possible contribution of mast cells. Inhal Toxicol 24:320–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Singh N, Manshian B, Jenkins GJ, Griffiths SM, Williams PM, Maffeis TG, Wright CJ, Doak SH (2009) NanoGenotoxicology: the DNA damaging potential of engineered nanomaterials. Biomaterials 30:3891–3914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Song MF, Li YS, Kasai H, Kawai K (2012) Metal nanoparticle-induced micronuclei and oxidative DNA damage in mice. J Clin Biochem Nutr 50:211–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vance ME, Kuiken T, Vejerano EP, McGinnis SP, Hochella MF Jr, Rejeski D, Hull MS (2015) Nanotechnology in the real world: redeveloping the nanomaterial consumer products inventory. Beilstein J Nanotechnol 6:1769–1780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wang W, Deng Z, Feng Y, Liao F, Zhou F, Feng S, Wang X (2017) PM2.5 induced apoptosis in endothelial cell through the activation of the p53-bax-caspase pathway. Chemosphere 177:135–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang W, Zeng C, Feng Y, Zhou F, Liao F, Liu Y, Feng S, Wang X (2018) The size-dependent effects of silica nanoparticles on endothelial cell apoptosis through activating the p53-caspase pathway. Environ Pollut 233:218–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Xu H, Wang X, Poschl U, Feng S, Wu D, Yang L, Li S, Song W, Sheng G, Fu J (2008) Genotoxicity of total and fractionated extractable organic matter in fine air particulate matter from urban Guangzhou: comparison between haze and nonhaze episodes. Environ Toxicol Chem 27:206–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yu T, Malugin A, Ghandehari H (2011) Impact of silica nanoparticle design on cellular toxicity and hemolytic activity. ACS Nano 5:5717–5728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yu X, Hong F, Zhang YQ (2016) Bio-effect of nanoparticles in the cardiovascular system. J Biomed Mater Res A 104:2881–2897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zhong Y, Feng SL, Luo Y, Zhang GD, Kong ZM (2001) Evaluating the genotoxicity of surface water of Yangzhong City using the Vicia faba micronucleus test and the comet assay. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 67:217–224Google Scholar
  44. Zolnik BS, Gonzalez-Fernandez A, Sadrieh N, Dobrovolskaia MA (2010) Nanoparticles and the immune system. Endocrinology 151:458–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The School of Public HealthUniversity of South ChinaHengyangChina
  2. 2.The First Affiliated HospitalUniversity of South ChinaHengyangChina
  3. 3.Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Environmental Protection and Resources UtilizationGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations