Fadeel, B. et al. Advanced tools for the safety assessment of nanomaterials. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 537–543 (2018).
Winkler, D. A. Role of artificial intelligence and machine learning in nanosafety. Small 16, 2001883 (2020).
Cherkasov, A. et al. QSAR modeling: where have you been? Where are you going to? J. Med. Chem. 57, 4977–5010 (2014).
Fourches, D. et al. Quantitative nanostructure-activity relationship modeling. ACS Nano 4, 5703–5712 (2010).
Puzyn, T. et al. Using nano-QSAR to predict the cytotoxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles. Nat. Nanotechnol. 6, 175–178 (2011).
Jeliazkova, N. et al. Towards FAIR nanosafety data. Nat. Nanotechnol. 16, 644–654 (2021).
Rybińska-Fryca, A., Mikolajczyk, A. & Puzyn, T. Structure–activity prediction networks (SAPNets): a step beyond Nano-QSAR for effective implementation of the safe-by-design concept. Nanoscale 12, 20669–20676 (2020).
Marchese Robinson, R. L. et al. How should the completeness and quality of curated nanomaterial data be evaluated? Nanoscale 8, 9919–9943 (2016).
Muratov, E. N. et al. QSAR without borders. Chem. Soc. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1039/d0cs00098a (2020).
Stone, V. et al. A framework for grouping and read-across of nanomaterials- supporting innovation and risk assessment. Nano Today https://doi.org/10.3390/nano10102017 (2020).
Papadiamantis, A. G. et al. Predicting cytotoxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles using Isalos Analytics Platform. Nanomaterials 10, 2493 (2020).
Puzyn, T. et al. in Recent Advances in Qsar Studies: Methods and Applications Vol. 8 (eds. Puzyn, T. et al.) 127–176 (Springer, 2010).
Shoombuatong, W. et al. in Advances in QSAR Modeling (Ed. Roy, K.) 3–55 (Springer, 2017).
Karakus, C. O. & Winkler, D. A. Overcoming roadblocks in computational roadmaps to the future for safe nanotechnology. Nano Futures 5, 22002 (2021).
Haase, A. & Klaessig, F. (eds) EU US roadmap nanoinformatics 2030. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1486012 (2018).
Mech, A. et al. Insights into possibilities for grouping and read-across for nanomaterials in EU chemicals legislation. Nanotoxicology 13, 119–141 (2019).
Miernicki, M., Hofmann, T., Eisenberger, I., von der Kammer, F. & Praetorius, A. Legal and practical challenges in classifying nanomaterials according to regulatory definitions. Nat. Nanotechnol. 14, 208–216 (2019).
Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (EUR-Lex, 18 December 2006); https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2006/1907/2014-04-10
Commission Regulation (EU) 2018/1881 (EUR-Lex, 3 December 2018); https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018R1881
Subbotina, J. & Lobaskin, V. Multiscale modeling of bio-nano interactions of zero-valent silver nanoparticles. J. Phys. Chem. B 126, 1301–1314 (2022).
Kochev, N., Jeliazkova, N. & Tsakovska, I. in Issues in Toxicology (eds. Neagu, D., Richarz, A.-N.) 69–107 (The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2020).
Commission Regulation (EU) 2018/1881 of 3 December 2018 amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) as regards Annexes I, III,VI, V (European Commission, 2018).
Guidance on Information Requirements and Chemical Safety Assessment: Appendix R.6-1 for Nanomaterials Applicable to the Guidance on QSARs and Grouping of Chemicals Version 2.0, 3 (ECHA, 2019); https://doi.org/10.2823/273911
Burello, E. Review of (Q)SAR models for regulatory assessment of nanomaterials risks. NanoImpact 8, 48–58 (2017).
Lynch, I., Weiss, C. & Valsami-Jones, E. A strategy for grouping of nanomaterials based on key physico-chemical descriptors as a basis for safer-by-design NMs. Nano Today 9, 266–270 (2014).
Lynch, I., Afantitis, A., Leonis, G., Melagraki, G. & Valsami-Jones, E. in Advances in QSAR modeling. Challenges and Advances in Computational Chemistry and Physics Vol. 24 (Ed. Roy, K.) 385–424 (Springer, 2017).
Lynch, I. & Lee, R. G. in Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management (eds. Murphy, F. et al.) 145–169 (Springer, 2016).
Mülhopt, S. et al. Characterization of nanoparticle batch-to-batch variability. Nanomaterials 8, 311 (2018).
Yao, Y. et al. High-throughput, combinatorial synthesis of multimetallic nanoclusters. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 6316–6322 (2020).
Kluender, E. J. et al. Catalyst discovery through megalibraries of nanomaterials. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 40–45 (2019).
Toxic Substances Control Act (US EPA,1979): https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-toxic-substances-control-act
TSCA Inventory Status of Nanoscale Substances – General Approach (US EPA, 2008); https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/control-nanoscale-materials-under
Nano-InChI working group; https://www.inchi-trust.org/nanomaterials/
Lynch, I. et al. Can an InChI for nano address the need for a simplified representation of complex nanomaterials across experimental and nanoinformatics studies? Nanomaterials 10, (2020).
Toropova, A. P. & Toropov, A. A. Nanomaterials: Quasi-SMILES as a flexible basis for regulation and environmental risk assessment. Sci. Total Environ. 823, 153747 (2022).
Toropov, A. A., Sizochenko, N., Toropova, A. P. & Leszczynski, J. Towards the development of global nano-quantitative structure-property relationship models: zeta potentials of metal oxide nanoparticles. Nanomaterials 8, 243 (2018).
Mikolajczyk, A. et al. Nano-QSAR modeling for ecosafe design of heterogeneous TiO2-based nano-photocatalysts. Environ. Sci. Nano 5, 1150–1160 (2018).
Mikolajczyk, A. et al. A chemoinformatics approach for the characterization of hybrid nanomaterials: safer and efficient design perspective. Nanoscale 11, 11808–11818 (2019).
Roy, J., Ojha, P. K. & Roy, K. Risk assessment of heterogeneous TiO2-based engineered nanoparticles (NPs): a QSTR approach using simple periodic table based descriptors. Nanotoxicology 13, 701–716 (2019).
Svendsen, C. et al. Key principles and operational practices for improved nanotechnology environmental exposure assessment. Nat. Nanotechnol. 15, 731–742 (2020).
Amos, J. D. et al. The NanoInformatics Knowledge Commons: capturing spatial and temporal nanomaterial transformations in diverse systems. NanoImpact 23, 100331 (2021).
Di Cristo, L. et al. Grouping hypotheses and an integrated approach to testing and assessment of nanomaterials following oral ingestion. Nanomaterials 11, 2623 (2021).
Afantitis, A., Melagraki, G., Tsoumanis, A., Valsami-Jones, E. & Lynch, I. A nanoinformatics decision support tool for the virtual screening of gold nanoparticle cellular association using protein corona fingerprints. Nanotoxicology 12, 1148–1165 (2018).
Wyrzykowska, E., Mikolajczyk, A., Sikorska, C. & Puzyn, T. Development of a novel in silico model of zeta potential for metal oxide nanoparticles: a nano-QSPR approach. Nanotechnology 27, 1–8 (2016).
Mikolajczyk, A. et al. Zeta potential for metal oxide nanoparticles: a predictive model developed by a nano-quantitative structure-property relationship approach. Chem. Mater. 27, 2400–2407 (2015).
Grzelczak, M., Liz-Marzan, L. M. & Klajn, R. Stimuli-responsive self-assembly of nanoparticles. Chem. Soc. Rev. 48, 1342–1361 (2019).
Liu, Y., Zhu, S., Gu, Z., Chen, C. & Zhao, Y. Toxicity of manufactured nanomaterials. Particuology 69, 31–48 (2022).
Baer, D. R., Munusamy, P. & Thrall, B. D. Provenance information as a tool for addressing engineered nanoparticle reproducibility challenges. Biointerphases 11, 04B401 (2016).
Mancardi, G. et al. Multi-scale modelling of aggregation of TiO2 nanoparticle suspensions in water. Nanomaterials 12, 217 (2022).
Alsharif, S. A., Power, D., Rouse, I. & Lobaskin, V. In silico prediction of protein adsorption energy on titanium dioxide and gold nanoparticles. Nanomaterials 10, 1967 (2020).
Rouse, I. et al. First principles characterisation of bio–nano interface. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 23, 13473–13482 (2021).
Rouse, I. & Lobaskin, V. A hard-sphere model of protein corona formation on spherical and cylindrical nanoparticles. Biophys. J. 120, 4457–4471 (2021).
Buzea, C., Pacheco, I. I. & Robbie, K. Nanomaterials and nanoparticles: sources and toxicity. Biointerphases 2, MR17–MR71 (2007).
Rabanel, J.-M. et al. Nanoparticle heterogeneity: an emerging structural parameter influencing particle fate in biological media? Nanoscale 11, 383–406 (2019).
Adjei, I. M., Peetla, C. & Labhasetwar, V. Heterogeneity in nanoparticles influences biodistribution and targeting. Nanomedicine 9, 267–278 (2014).
Appendix for Nanoforms Applicable to the Guidance on Registration and Substance Identification (ECHA, 2019); https://doi.org/10.2823/832485
Caputo, F., Clogston, J., Calzolai, L., Rösslein, M. & Prina-Mello, A. Measuring particle size distribution of nanoparticle enabled medicinal products, the joint view of EUNCL and NCI-NCL. A step by step approach combining orthogonal measurements with increasing complexity. J. Control. Release 299, 31–43 (2019).
Lundqvist, M. et al. The evolution of the protein corona around nanoparticles: A test study. ACS Nano 5, 7503–7509 (2011).
Chetwynd, A. J., Zhang, W., Thorn, J. A., Lynch, I. & Ramautar, R. The nanomaterial metabolite corona determined using a quantitative metabolomics approach: a pilot study. Small 16, 2000295 (2020).
Yan, X. et al. In silico profiling nanoparticles: predictive nanomodeling using universal nanodescriptors and various machine learning approaches. Nanoscale 11, 8352–8362 (2019).
Yan, X., Sedykh, A., Wang, W., Yan, B. & Zhu, H. Construction of a web-based nanomaterial database by big data curation and modeling friendly nanostructure annotations. Nat. Commun. 11, 1–10 (2020).
Sizochenko, N. et al. From basic physics to mechanisms of toxicity: the ‘liquid drop’ approach applied to develop predictive classification models for toxicity of metal oxide nanoparticles. Nanoscale 6, 13986–13993 (2014).
Sizochenko, N., Jagiello, K., Leszczynski, J. & Puzyn, T. How the ‘liquid drop’ approach could be efficiently applied for quantitative structure-property relationship modeling of nanofluids. J. Phys. Chem. C 119, 25542–25547 (2015).
Utembe, W., Potgieter, K., Stefaniak, A. B. & Gulumian, M. Dissolution and biodurability: Important parameters needed for risk assessment of nanomaterials. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 12, 11 (2015).
Lin, S. et al. Zebrafish high-throughput screening to study the impact of dissolvable metal oxide nanoparticles on the hatching enzyme, ZHE1. Small 9, 1776–1785 (2013).
Kokot, H. et al. Prediction of chronic inflammation for inhaled particles: the impact of material cycling and quarantining in the lung epithelium. Adv. Mater. 32, 2003913 (2020).
Ellis, L.-J. A. & Lynch, I. Mechanistic insights into toxicity pathways induced by nanomaterials in Daphnia magna from analysis of the composition of the acquired protein corona. Environ. Sci. Nano 7, 3343–3359 (2020).
Uhlen, M. et al. Towards a knowledge-based Human Protein Atlas. Nat. Biotechnol. 28, 1248–1250 (2010).
Wheeler, K. E. et al. Environmental dimensions of the protein corona. Nat. Nanotechnol. 16, 617–629 (2021).
Smythers, A. L. & Hicks, L. M. Mapping the plant proteome: tools for surveying coordinating pathways. Emerg. Top. Life Sci. 5, 203–220 (2021).
Jagiello, K. et al. Transcriptomics-based and AOP-informed structure-activity relationships to predict pulmonary pathology induced by multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Small 17, 2003465 (2020).
Myden, A., Hill, E. & Fowkes, A. Using adverse outcome pathways to contextualise (Q)SAR predictions for reproductive toxicity – a case study with aromatase inhibition. Reprod. Toxicol. 108, 43–55 (2022).
Ellison, C. M., Piechota, P., Madden, J. C., Enoch, S. J. & Cronin, M. T. D. Adverse outcome pathway (AOP) informed modeling of aquatic toxicology: QSARs, read-across, and interspecies verification of modes of action. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 3995–4007 (2016).
Seo, M., Chae, C. H., Lee, Y., Kim, H. R. & Kim, J. Novel QSAR models for molecular initiating event modeling in two intersecting adverse outcome pathways based pulmonary fibrosis prediction for biocidal mixtures. Toxics 9, 59 (2021).
Halappanavar, S. et al. Adverse outcome pathways as a tool for the design of testing strategies to support the safety assessment of emerging advanced materials at the nanoscale. Part. Fibre Toxicol. 17, 16 (2020).
Toropova, A. P., Toropov, A. A. & Benfenati, E. QSPR as a random event: solubility of fullerenes C[60] and C[70]. Fuller. Nanotub. Carbon Nanostruct. 27, 816–821 (2019).
Toropov, A. A. & Toropova, A. P. Quasi-SMILES and nano-QFAR: united model for mutagenicity of fullerene and MWCNT under different conditions. Chemosphere 139, 18–22 (2015).
