Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Long-term monitoring for nanomedicine implants and drugs

Nature Nanotechnology volume 11, pages 206–210 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Increasing globalization means that traditional occupational epidemiological approaches may no longer apply, suggesting a need for an alternative model to assess the long-term impact of nanomaterial exposure on health.

The Royal Society conference Bionano Interactions: New Tools, Insights and Impacts (30 April to 1 May 2014) discussed translating potential nanobiotechnologies into clinical applications, and assessed their safety and science-based regulatory regimes1. A key topic of debate was whether nanomaterials and nanostructures require additional or alternative risk assessment approaches, and what form these might take. In exposure assessment, it was suggested that occupational epidemiology approaches might no longer apply because of increased globalization, in which material production has become geographically dispersed and consumer purchasing patterns have changed. Instead, exposure to nanomedicines (for example diagnostics such as contrast agents or therapeutics such as drug delivery agents) and nanostructured implants may represent a significant new exposure route or cohort for epidemiological studies of nano-related health effects2.

Your institute does not have access to this article

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

Buy

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Illustration of the challenge in identifying suitable nanomaterial-exposed cohorts using the traditional occupational exposure paradigm.
Figure 2: Illustration of the range of application areas of nanomedicines.

References

  1. Lynch, I., Feitshans, I. L. & Kendall, M. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 370, 20140162 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kendall, M. & Holgate, S. Respirology 17, 743–758 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Künzli, N. Swiss Med. Wkly 135, 697–702 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Foss Hansen, S. M., Baun, A. & Tickner, J. A. Nature Nanotech. 3, 444–447 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Oberdörster, G., Oberdörster, E. & Oberdörster, J. Environ. Health Perspect. 113, 823–839 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Donaldson, K. & Poland, C. A. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 24, 724–734 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kuempel, E. D., Geraci, C. L. & Schulte, P. A. Ann. Occup. Hyg. 56, 491–505 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Migliore, L. & Coppedè, F. Mutat. Res. 512, 135–153 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Current Intelligence Bulletin 63: Occupational Exposure to Titanium Dioxide (2011); http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2011-160

  10. Woskie, S. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Nanomed. Nanobiotechnol. 2, 685–692 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Schulte, P. A. et al. J. Nanopart. Res. 16, 2153 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Maine, E., Thomas, V. J., Bliemel, M., Murira, A. & Utterback, J. Nature Nanotech. 9, 2–5 (2014).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Woodrow Wilson Centre The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies: Consumer Products Inventory; http://www.nanotechproject.org/cpi

  14. Nohynek, G. J., Lademann, J., Ribaud, C. & Roberts, M. S. Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 3, 251–277 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bowman, D. M., van Calster, C. & Friedrichs, S. Nature Nanotech. 5, 92 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Guidance for Industry: Safety of Nanomaterials in Cosmetic Products FDA-2011-D-0489 (FDA, 2014).

  17. European Commission and ETP Nanomedicine Roadmaps in Nanomedicine: Towards 2020 (2009); http://go.nature.com/xRdlgP

  18. Biomaterials Market for Implantable Devices (Material Type — Metals, Polymers, Ceramics and Natural, Applications — Cardiology, Orthopedics, Dental, Ophthalmology and Others): Global Industry Analysis, Size, Share, Growth, Trends and Forecast 2013–2019 (Transparency Market Research, 2012).

  19. Hartmann, A. et al. PLoS ONE 8, e70359 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bhabra, G. et al. Nature Nanotech. 4, 876–883 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cogan, N. et al. Mutat. Res. 683, 1–8 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hannemann, F. H. A. et al. Orthopaed. Traumatol. Surg. Res. 99, 263–271 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Nanotechnology in Medical Applications: The Global Market Report code: HLC069C (BCC Research, 2015); http://go.nature.com/svt6uT

  24. Ventola, C. L. Pharm. Therap. 37, 512–525 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Schütz, C. A., Juillerat-Jeanneret, L., Mueller, H., Lynch, I. & Riediker, M. Nanomedicine (Lond). 8, 449–467 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Andrade, F. et al. Nanomedicine 11, 1621–1631 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Li, X. et al. Nanomedicine 11, 1377–1385 (2015).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Weir, A., Paul Westerhoff, P., Fabricius, L. & von Goetz, N. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 2242–2250 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Harper, M. et al. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 25, 381–387 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Jilka, S. R., Callahan, R., Sevdalis, N., Mayer, E. K. & Darzi, A. J. Med. Internet Res. 17, e161 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Pautler, M. & Brenner, S. Int. J. Nanomed. 5, 803–809 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Armand, L. et al. Nanotoxicology 19, 1–33 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kattlove, H. & Winn, R. J. CA Cancer J. Clin. 53, 172–196 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Klompas, M., Yokoe, D. S. & Weinstein, R. A. Clin. Infect. Dis. 48, 1268–1275 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Nanotechnology: Small Matter, Many Unknowns (SwissRe, 2004).

  36. Lloyd's Emerging Risks Team Nanotechnology. Recent Developments, Risks and Opportunities (Lloyd's, 2007).

  37. Mullins, M., Murphy, F., Baublyte, L., McAlea, E. M. & Tofail, S. A. Nature Nanotech. 8, 222–224 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ventola, C. L. Pharm. Therapeut. 37, 582–591 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Loubaton, B. Exploring the quantitative dimensions of the economic impact of nanomedicine. Int. Symp. on Assessing the Economic Impact of Nanotechnology (2012); http://go.nature.com/xBYZCS

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Michaela Kendall is at the School of Metallurgy and Materials, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston B15 2TT, UK,

    Michaela Kendall

  2. Iseult Lynch is at the School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston B15 2TT, UK,

    Iseult Lynch

Authors
  1. Michaela Kendall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Iseult Lynch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Michaela Kendall or Iseult Lynch.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kendall, M., Lynch, I. Long-term monitoring for nanomedicine implants and drugs. Nature Nanotech 11, 206–210 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2015.341

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2015.341

Further reading

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Find nanotechnology articles, nanomaterial data and patents all in one place. Visit Nano by Nature Research