Nanotechnology is a key enabling technology with billions of euros in global investment from public funding, which include large collaborative projects that have investigated environmental and health safety aspects of nanomaterials, but the reuse of accumulated data is clearly lagging behind. Here we summarize challenges and provide recommendations for the efficient reuse of nanosafety data, in line with the recently established FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable) guiding principles. We describe the FAIR-aligned Nanosafety Data Interface, with an aggregated findability, accessibility and interoperability across physicochemical, bio–nano interaction, human toxicity, omics, ecotoxicological and exposure data. Overall, we illustrate a much-needed path towards standards for the optimized use of existing data, which avoids duplication of efforts, and provides a multitude of options to promote safe and sustainable nanotechnology.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
The datasets described here are available through the Nanosafety Data Interface and the NanoReg2 database (https://search.data.enanomapper.net/projects/nanoreg2). Data generated within NANoREG, NanoReg2 and the omics metadata are publicly available under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. The NanoReg2 generated data is also available as SQL (DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4713745, accessed 23 April 2021). Data that originate from the projects NanoTEST, ENPRA, MARINA and NANOGENOTOX are currently restricted from public use.
Soeteman-Hernandez, L. G. et al. Safe innovation approach: towards an agile system for dealing with innovations. Mater. Today Commun. 20, 100548 (2019).
Nymark, P. et al. Toward rigorous materials production: new approach methodologies have extensive potential to improve current safety assessment practices. Small 16, 1904749 (2020).
Karcher, S. et al. Integration among databases and data sets to support productive nanotechnology: challenges and recommendations. NanoImpact 9, 85–101 (2018).
Powers, C. M. et al. Nanocuration workflows: establishing best practices for identifying, inputting, and sharing data to inform decisions on nanomaterials. Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 6, 1860–1871 (2015).
Mahony, C., Currie, R., Daston, G., Kleinstreuer, N. & van de Water, B. Highlight report: ‘Big data in the 3R’s: outlook and recommendations’, a roundtable summary. Arch. Toxicol. 92, 1015–1020 (2018).
Haase, A. & Klaessig, F. EU–US Roadmap Nanoinformatics 2030 (EU Nanosafety Cluster, 2017); https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1486012
Marchese Robinson, R. L. et al. How should the completeness and quality of curated nanomaterial data be evaluated? Nanoscale 8, 9919–9943 (2016).
Giusti, A. et al. Nanomaterial grouping: existing approaches and future recommendations. NanoImpact 16, 100182 (2019).
Haase, A. & Lynch, I. Quality in nanosafety—towards reliable nanomaterial safety assessment. NanoImpact 11, 67–68 (2018).
Comandella, D., Gottardo, S., Rio-Echevarria, I. M. & Rauscher, H. Quality of physicochemical data on nanomaterials: an assessment of data completeness and variability. Nanoscale 12, 4695–4708 (2020).
Tropsha, A., Mills, K. C. & Hickey, A. J. Reproducibility, sharing and progress in nanomaterial databases. Nat. Nanotechnol. 12, 1111–1114 (2017).
Wilkinson, M. D. et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci. Data 3, 160018 (2016).
Hendren, C. O., Powers, C. M., Hoover, M. D. & Harper, S. L. The Nanomaterial Data Curation Initiative: a collaborative approach to assessing, evaluating, and advancing the state of the field. Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 6, 1752–1762 (2015).
European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) Strategic Implementation Plan (European Commission, 2019); https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/78ae5276-ae8e-11e9-9d01-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
A New Industrial Strategy for Europe (European Commission, 2020); https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/communication-eu-industrial-strategy-march-2020_en.pdf
A New Circular Economy Action Plan for a Cleaner and More Competitive Europe (European Commission, 2020); https://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/new_circular_economy_action_plan.pdf
Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability Towards a Toxic-Free Environment (European Commission, 2021); https://ec.europa.eu/environment/pdf/chemicals/2020/10/Strategy.pdf
Jeliazkova, N. et al. The eNanoMapper database for nanomaterial safety information. Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 6, 1609–1634 (2015).
Jeliazkova, N. et al. Linking LRI AMBIT chemoinformatic system with the IUCLID substance database to support read-across of substance endpoint data and category formation. Toxicol. Lett. 258, S114–S115 (2016).
Kochev, N., Jeliazkova, N. & Tsakovska, I. in Big Data in Predictive Toxicology (eds Neagu, D. & Richarz, A.-N.) 69–107 (The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2020).
Hastings, J. et al. eNanoMapper: harnessing ontologies to enable data integration for nanomaterial risk assessment. J. Biomed. Semant. 6, 10–10 (2015).
Totaro, S. et al. The JRC Nanomaterials Repository: a unique facility providing representative test materials for nanoEHS research. Regul. Toxicol. Pharm. 81, 334–340 (2016).
Chomenidis, C. et al. Jaqpot Quattro: a novel computational web platform for modeling and analysis in nanoinformatics. J. Chem. Inf. Model 57, 2161–2172 (2017).
Mech, A. et al. Insights into possibilities for grouping and read-across for nanomaterials in EU chemicals legislation. Nanotoxicology 13, 119–141 (2019).
Precupas, A. et al. Thermodynamic parameters at bio–nano Interface and nanomaterial toxicity: a case study on BSA interaction with ZnO, SiO2, and TiO2. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 33, 2054–2071 (2020).
Berrios, D. C., Beheshti, A. & Costes, S. V. FAIRness and usability for open-access omics data systems. AMIA Annu Symp. Proc. 2018, 232–241 (2018).
Jeliazkova, N. eNanoMapper—parsers for different NM data formats GitHub https://github.com/enanomapper/nmdataparser
Kochev, N. et al. Your spreadsheets can be FAIR: a tool and FAIRification workflow for the eNanoMapper Database. Nanomaterials 10, 1908 (2020).
Gottardo, S. et al. NANoREG Framework for the Safety Assessment of Nanomaterials (Joint Research Centre, 2017); https://doi.org/10.2760/245972
Kermanizadeh, A. et al. A multilaboratory toxicological assessment of a panel of 10 engineered nanomaterials to human health—ENPRA Project—the highlights, limitations, and current and future challenges. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health B 19, 1–28 (2016).
Bos, P. M. J. et al. The MARINA risk assessment strategy: a flexible strategy for efficient information collection and risk assessment of nanomaterials. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 12, 15007–15021 (2015).
Nesslany, F. NANOGENOTOX European joint action: what could we learn from all these data?. Toxicol. Lett. 229, S35 (2014).
Juillerat-Jeanneret, L. et al. Biological impact assessment of nanomaterial used in nanomedicine. Introduction to the NanoTEST project. Nanotoxicology 9, 5–12 (2015).
Dusinska, M. et al. Towards an alternative testing strategy for nanomaterials used in nanomedicine: lessons from NanoTEST. Nanotoxicology 9, 118–132 (2015).
Nano Exposure & Contextual Information Database (NECID) (PEROSCH, accessed 1 March 2020); https://perosh.eu/research-projects/perosh-projects/necid/
Pelzer, J. Structure and functionality of the Nano Exposure and Contextual Information Database (NECID). Gefahrst. Reinhalt. Luft. 73, 302–304 (2013).
Barrett, T. et al. NCBI GEO: archive for functional genomics data sets—update. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, D991–D995 (2013).
Kolesnikov, N. et al. ArrayExpress update—simplifying data submissions. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, D1113–D1116 (2015).
NANOSOLUTIONS Data Repository (NANOSOLUTIONS, accessed 1 March 2020); http://nanosolutionsfp7.com/
Fernández-Cruz, M. L. et al. Quality evaluation of human and environmental toxicity studies performed with nanomaterials—the GUIDEnano approach. Environ. Sci. Nano 5, 381–397 (2018).
Gottardo, S., Quiros Pesudo, L., Totaro, S., Riego Sintes, J. & Crutzen, H. NANoREG Harmonised Terminology for Environmental Health and Safety Assessment of Nanomaterials (European Commission, 2017); https://doi.org/10.2788/71213
Krebs, A. et al. Template for the description of cell-based toxicological test methods to allow evaluation and regulatory use of the data. ATLA 36, 682–699 (2019).
Totaro, S., Crutzen, H. & Riego Sintes, J. Data Logging Templates for the Environmental, Health and Safety Assessment of Nanomaterials (Joint Research Centre, 2017); https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC103178
NANoREG Results Repository (RIVM, 2017); https://www.rivm.nl/en/about-rivm/mission-and-strategy/international-affairs/international-projects/nanoreg
Wilkinson, M. D. et al. Evaluating FAIR maturity through a scalable, automated, community-governed framework. Sci. Data 6, 174 (2019).
Criteria for FAIR Research Data (Swedish Research Council, 2019); https://staff.ki.se/the-fair-principles
Collins, S. et al. Turning FAIR into Reality. Final Report and Action Plan from the European Commission Expert Group on FAIR Data (European Commission, 2018); https://doi.org/10.2777/1524
Willighagen E., Jeliazkova N. NanoCommons—nanomaterial identifiers, basis for European Registry of Nanomaterials (ERM) GitHub https://github.com/NanoCommons/identifiers/blob/master/registry
Nymark, P. et al. caLIBRAte D5.3—Document on Quality Criteria for Data (EU Nanosafety Cluster, 2017); https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3859951
Ammar, A. et al. A semi-automated workflow for FAIR maturity indicators in the life sciences. Nanomaterials 10, 2068 (2020).
Nymark, P. et al. Grouping of representative nanomaterials is efficiently executed by combining high-throughput-generated biological data with physicochemical data. Toxicol. Lett. 314, abstr. OP02-02 (2019).
Marvel, S. W. et al. ToxPi Graphical User Interface 2.0: dynamic exploration, visualization, and sharing of integrated data models. BMC Bioinf. 19, 80 (2018).
Lamon, L. et al. Grouping of nanomaterials to read-across hazard endpoints: from data collection to assessment of the grouping hypothesis by application of chemoinformatic techniques. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 15, 37 (2018).
Antikainen, M., Uusitalo, T. & Kivikytö-Reponen, P. Digitalisation as an enabler of circular economy. Procedia CIRP 73, 45–49 (2018).
Falzetti, M., Keiper, W., Igartua, A. & Alliance for Materials (A4M) Consortium. Opinion Paper on Governance and Strategic Programming of Materials Research and Innovation in Horizon Europe (EUMAT, 2019); https://www.eumat.eu/media/uploads/descargas/2019_02_a4m_position_paper_v44.pdf
Carusi, A. et al. Harvesting the promise of AOPs: an assessment and recommendations. Sci. Total Environ. 628–629, 1542–1556 (2018).
Martens, M. et al. WikiPathways: connecting communities. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, D613–D621 (2021).
Davis, A. P. et al. Comparative Toxicogenomics Database (CTD): update 2021. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, D1138–D1143 (2021).
Sansone, S.-A. et al. Toward interoperable bioscience data. Nat. Genet. 44, 121–126 (2012).
Jeliazkova, N., Haase, A., Ritchie, P., Shahzad, R. & Nymark, P. NanoReg2 D1.8—Report on the Defined ISA‐TAB Nano Templates (European Commission, 2016).
Jeliazkova, N. & Jeliazkov, V. AMBIT RESTful web services: an implementation of the OpenTox application programming interface. J. Cheminformatics 3, 18 (2011).
Shandilya, N. et al. NanoReg2 D3.2—Database/Structural Model and Report Describing the Relationships between Functionality, Physicochemical Properties and Hazard, and Allowing for Integration in the Safe Innovation Approach (2018); https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3854938
NANoREG D6.05 Database sql (RIVM, accessed 23 November 2019); https://www.rivm.nl/en/documenten/nanoreg-d605-database-sql
Tanasescu, S. et al. in Nanomaterials—Functional Properties and Applications (eds Zaharescu, M. et al.) 85–97 (Publishing House of the Romanian Academy, 2020).
Jeliazkova, N. et al. eNanoMapper D3.4—ISA-Tab Templates for Common Bioselected Set of Assays (European Commission, 2014); https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.375814
The work leading to this article has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme, Grant Agreements no. 646221 (NanoReg2, 2015–2019), no. 814401 (Gov4Nano, 2019–2022) and no. 814425 (RiskGONE 2019–2023). In addition, the European Union’s 7th Framework Programme projects NANoREG (2013–2017, Grant Agreement no. 310584), NanoTEST (2008–2012, no. 201335) and ENPRA (2009–2012, no. 228789), the European Union’s Health Programme Joint Action project NANOGENOTOX (2010–2013, no. 2009 21 01) and the US NIH NCI caNanoLab portal are acknowledged for providing data.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information Nature Nanotechnology thanks Wojciech Chrzanowski and Iseult Lynch for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Jeliazkova, N., Apostolova, M.D., Andreoli, C. et al. Towards FAIR nanosafety data. Nat. Nanotechnol. 16, 644–654 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-021-00911-6
This article is cited by
Journal of Cheminformatics (2023)
Nature Nanotechnology (2023)
(Re)Conceptualizing decision-making tools in a risk governance framework for emerging technologies—the case of nanomaterials
Environment Systems and Decisions (2023)
Digital research data: from analysis of existing standards to a scientific foundation for a modular metadata schema in nanosafety
Particle and Fibre Toxicology (2022)
Environmental Sciences Europe (2022)