Cerium (IV) oxide (CeO2), which is used as a biomaterial, has wide application in areas such as the biomedical, glass polishing, electronic, automotive, and pharmacology industries. Comparing with the literature, in this study, the genotoxic effects of cerium (IV) oxide microparticles (COMPs) and cerium (IV) oxide nanoparticles (CONPs) were investigated for the first time in human peripheral blood cultures at concentrations of 0.78, 1.56, 3.125, 6.25, 12.5, 25, and 50 ppm for 72 h under in vitro conditions. Particle sizes of COMPs and CONPs were determined using scanning electron microscopic analysis. Micronucleus and chromosome aberration tests were used to determine the genotoxicity of COMPs and CONPs. The average particle sizes of COMPs and CONPs were approximately 148.25 and 25.30 nm, respectively. It was determined that CeO2 particles in both micro and nano sizes were toxic at all concentrations compared to the negative control group (distilled water). Importantly, COMPs and CONPs were genotoxic even at the lowest concentration (0.78 ppm). Comparing particle sizes, the data indicated that COMPs were more toxic than CONPs. The results suggest that genotoxicity of COMPs and CONPs may be a function of applied concentrations and particle sizes.
AkbabaGBTürkezH (2018) Investigation of the genotoxicity of aluminum oxide, β-tricalcium phosphate, and zinc oxide nanoparticles in vitro. International Journal of Toxicology37(3): 216–222.
2.
AuffanMRoseJOrsiereT, et al. (2009) CeO2 nanoparticles induce DNA damage towards human dermal fibroblasts in vitro. Nanotoxicology3(2): 161–171.
3.
BenameurLAuffanMCassienM, et al. (2015) DNA damage and oxidative stress induced by CeO2 nanoparticles in human dermal fibroblasts: evidence of a clastogenic effect as a mechanism of genotoxicity. Nanotoxicology9(6): 696–705.
4.
DadookMMehrabianSSalehiM, et al. (2014) Morphological, biochemical and molecular characterization of twelve nitrogen-fixing bacteria and their response to various zinc concentration. Jundishapur Journal of Microbiology7(4).DOI: 10.5812/jjm.9415.
5.
De MarziLMonacoADe LapuenteJ, et al. (2013) Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of ceria nanoparticles on different cell lines in vitro. International Journal of Molecular Sciences14(2): 3065–3077.
6.
EvansHJ (1984) Human peripheral blood lymphocytes for the analysis of chromosome aberrations in mutagen tests. In: KilbeyBJLegatorMNicholsW, et al. (eds) Handbook of Mutagenicity Test Procedures. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 405–427.
7.
FenechM (2000) The in vitro micronucleus technique. Mutation Research/Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis455(1): 81–95.
8.
FenechMChangWPKirsch-VoldersM, et al. (2003) HUMN project: detailed description of the scoring criteria for the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay using isolated human lymphocyte cultures. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis534(1–2): 65–75.
9.
ForestVLeclercLHochepiedJ-F, et al. (2017) Impact of cerium oxide nanoparticles shape on their in vitro cellular toxicity. Toxicology In Vitro38: 136–141.
10.
HeLSuYLanhongJ, et al. (2015) Recent advances of cerium oxide nanoparticles in synthesis, luminescence and biomedical studies: a review. Journal of Rare Earths33(8): 791–799.
11.
HeckertEGKarakotiASSealS, et al. (2008) The role of cerium redox state in the SOD mimetic activity of nanoceria. Biomaterials29(18): 2705–2709.
12.
HuangXLiL-DLyuG-M, et al. (2018) Chitosan-coated cerium oxide nanocubes accelerate cutaneous wound healing by curtailing persistent inflammation. Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers5(2): 386–393.
13.
IPCS (International Program on Chemical Safety) (1985) Environmental health criteria, 46. In: Guidelines for the Study of Genetic Effects in Human Populations. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1985, p. 45.
14.
KargarHGhasemiFDarroudiM (2015) Bioorganic polymer-based synthesis of cerium oxide nanoparticles and their cell viability assays. Ceramics International41(1): 1589–1594.
15.
Könen-AdıgüzelSErgeneS (2018) In vitro evaluation of the genotoxicity of CeO2 nanoparticles in human peripheral blood lymphocytes using cytokinesis-block micronucleus test, comet assay, and gamma H2AX. Toxicology and Industrial Health34(5): 293–300.
16.
KosMJemec KokaljAGlavanG, et al. (2017) Cerium (IV) oxide nanoparticles induce sublethal changes in honeybees after chronic exposure. Environmental Science: Nano4(12): 2297–2310.
17.
KumariMKumariSIGroverP (2014) Genotoxicity analysis of cerium oxide micro and nanoparticles in Wistar rats after 28 days of repeated oral administration. Mutagenesis29(6): 467–479.
18.
LiSHePDongJ, et al. (2005) DNA-directed self-assembling of carbon nanotubes. Journal of the American Chemical Society127(1): 14–15.
19.
LimanRAcikbasYCiğerciİH (2019) Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of cerium oxide micro and nanoparticles by allium and comet tests. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety168: 408–414.
20.
NazSKazmiSTBZiaM (2019) CeO2 nanoparticles synthesized through green chemistry are biocompatible: in vitro and in vivo assessment. Journal of Biochemical and Molecular Toxicology33(5): e22291.
21.
NiuJAzferARogersL, et al. (2007) Cardioprotective effects of cerium oxide nanoparticles in a transgenic murine model of cardiomyopathy. Cardiovascular Research73(3): 549–559.
22.
OberdörsterGOberdörsterEOberdörsterJ (2005) Nanotoxicology: an emerging discipline evolving from studies of ultrafine particles. Environmental Health Perspectives113(7): 823–839.
23.
PirmohamedTDowdingJMSinghS, et al. (2010) Nanoceria exhibit redox state-dependent catalase mimetic activity. Chemical Communications46(16): 2736.
24.
RubioLAnnangiBVilaL, et al. (2016) Antioxidant and anti-genotoxic properties of cerium oxide nanoparticles in a pulmonary-like cell system. Archives of Toxicology90(2): 269–278.
25.
Titenko-HollandNWindhamGKolachanaP, et al. (1997) Genotoxicity of malathion in human lymphocytes assessed using the micronucleus assay in vitro and in vivo: a study of malathion-exposed workers. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis388(1): 85–95.
26.
VariniESánchez-SalcedoSMalavasiG, et al. (2019) Cerium (III) and (IV) containing mesoporous glasses/alginate beads for bone regeneration: bioactivity, biocompatibility and reactive oxygen species activity. Materials Science and Engineering: C105: 109971.
27.
WalkeyCDasSSealS, et al. (2015) Catalytic properties and biomedical applications of cerium oxide nanoparticles. Environmental Science: Nano2(1): 33–53.
28.
WuJMaYDingY, et al. (2019) Toxicity of two different size ceria nanoparticles to mice after repeated intranasal instillation. Journal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology19(5): 2474–2482.
29.
ZhangMZhangCZhaiX, et al. (2019) Antibacterial mechanism and activity of cerium oxide nanoparticles. Science China Materials62(11): 1727–1739.
