Nanomaterial Exposure, Extracellular Vesicle Biogenesis and Adverse Cellular Outcomes: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The progressively increasing use of nanomaterials (NMs) has awakened issues related to nanosafety and its potential toxic effects on human health. Emerging studies suggest that NMs alter cell communication by reshaping and altering the secretion of extracellular vesicles (EVs), leading to dysfunction in recipient cells. However, there is limited understanding of how the physicochemical characteristics of NMs alter the EV content and their consequent physiological functions. Therefore, this review explored the relevance of EVs in the nanotoxicology field. The current state of the art on how EVs are modulated by NM exposure and the possible regulation and modulation of signaling pathways and physiological responses were assessed in detail. This review followed the manual for reviewers produced by The Joanna Brigs Institute for Scoping Reviews and the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. The research question, "Do NMs modulate cellular responses mediated by EVs?" was analyzed following the PECO model (P (Population) = EVs, E (Exposure) = NMs, C (Comparator) = EVs without exposure to NMs, O (Outcome) = Cellular responses/change in EVs) to help methodologically assess the association between exposure and outcome. For each theme in the PECO acronym, keywords were defined, organized, and researched in PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, up to 30 September 2021. In vitro, in vivo, ex vivo, and clinical studies that analyzed the effect of NMs on EV biogenesis, cargo, and cellular responses were included in the analysis. The methodological quality assessment was conducted using the ToxRTool, ARRIVE guideline, Newcastle Ottawa and the EV-TRACK platform. The search in the referred databases identified 2944 articles. After applying the eligibility criteria and two-step screening, 18 articles were included in the final review. We observed that depending on the concentration and physicochemical characteristics, specific NMs promote a significant increase in EV secretion as well as changes in their cargo, especially regarding the expression of proteins and miRNAs, which, in turn, were involved in biological processes that included cell communication, angiogenesis, and activation of the immune response, etc. Although further studies are necessary, this work suggests that molecular investigations on EVs induced by NM exposure may become a potential tool for toxicological studies since they are widely accessible biomarkers that may form a bridge between NM exposure and the cellular response and pathological outcome.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".