Genotoxicity and inflammatory potential of stainless steel welding fume particles: an in vitro study on standard vs Cr(VI)-reduced flux-cored wires and the role of released metals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Welders are daily exposed to various levels of welding fumes containing several metals. This exposure can lead to an increased risk for different health effects which serves as a driving force to develop new methods that generate less toxic fumes. The aim of this study was to explore the role of released metals for welding particle-induced toxicity and to test the hypothesis that a reduction of Cr(VI) in welding fumes results in less toxicity by comparing the welding fume particles of optimized Cr(VI)-reduced flux-cored wires (FCWs) to standard FCWs. The welding particles were thoroughly characterized, and toxicity (cell viability, DNA damage and inflammation) was assessed following exposure to welding particles as well as their released metal fraction using cultured human bronchial epithelial cells (HBEC-3kt, 5-100 µg/mL) and human monocyte-derived macrophages (THP-1, 10-50 µg/mL). The results showed that all Cr was released as Cr(VI) for welding particles generated using standard FCWs whereas only minor levels (< 3% of total Cr) were released from the newly developed FCWs. Furthermore, the new FCWs were considerably less cytotoxic and did not cause any DNA damage in the doses tested. For the standard FCWs, the Cr(VI) released in cell media seemed to explain a large part of the cytotoxicity and DNA damage. In contrast, all particles caused rather similar inflammatory effects suggesting different underlying mechanisms. Taken together, this study suggests a potential benefit of substituting standard FCWs with Cr(VI)-reduced wires to achieve less toxic welding fumes and thus reduced risks for welders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".