Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

Genotoxicity assessment of titanium dioxide nanoparticle accumulation of 90 days in the liver of gpt delta transgenic mice

Genes and Environment volume 42, Article number: 7 (2020) Cite this article

A Correction to this article was published on 03 March 2020

This article has been updated

Abstract

Backgound

A variety of in vivo and in vitro studies to assess the genotoxicity of titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NPs) have been reported, but the results are inconsistent. Recently, we reported that TiO2 NPs exhibit no genotoxic effects in the liver and erythrocytes during a relatively brief period following intravenous injection into mice. However, there is no information about long-term genotoxicity due to TiO2 NP accumulation in tissues. In this study, we investigated the long-term mutagenic effects of TiO2 NPs and the localization of residual TiO2 NPs in mouse liver after multiple intravenous injections.

Results

Male gpt delta C57BL/6 J mice were administered with various doses of TiO2 NPs weekly for 4 consecutive weeks. The long-term mutagenic effects on the liver were analyzed using gpt and Spi− mutation assays 90 days after the final injection. We also quantified the amount of titanium in the liver using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and observed the localization of TiO2 NPs in the liver using transmission electron microscopy. Although TiO2 NPs were found in the liver cells, the gpt and Spi− mutation frequencies in the liver were not significantly increased by the TiO2 NP administration.

Conclusions

These results clearly show that TiO2 NPs have no mutagenic effects on the liver, even though the particles remain in the liver long-term.

Introduction

Titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2 NPs) have become widely used in several industrial applications. Ultrafine TiO2 NPs (10–50 nm) cause lung cancer in rats through chronic inhalation [1]. Therefore, TiO2 NPs are classified as an IARC Group 2B carcinogen (possibly carcinogenic to humans) [1, 2]. Genotoxicity is one of the key factors to assess the carcinogenic risk to humans. Several studies in mice and rats have reported conflicting results of various genotoxic endpoint analyses [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. Recently, we reported that TiO2 NPs have no genotoxic effects in the liver and erythrocytes when intravenously injected into gpt delta mice [17], but there are still reports about their positive effect [18, 19]. Thus, the genotoxicity of TiO2 NPs remains unclear [20, 21].

TiO2 NPs in the rodent bloodstream are translocated to the liver and remain in the tissue long-term [22,23,24,25]. However, the long-term genotoxic effects of TiO2 NPs in the liver are not well understood. To investigate the long-term genotoxic effects, the mutagenicity is the optimum endpoint among various genotoxic endpoints because of the accumulation potential of TiO2 NPs. In this study, we examined the long-term mutagenicity of TiO2 NPs and the amount and localization of the remaining particles in the liver after intravenous injection in gpt delta mice [26]. Our results indicated that TiO2 NPs show no mutagenicity in the tissue, although they remain within the liver cells for an extended period of time.

Materials and methods

Animals and reagents

The guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals set forth by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the Japan National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health were followed. Male C57BL/6 J gpt delta mice were obtained from Japan SLC (Shizuoka, Japan). They were housed under specific pathogen-free conditions with a 12 h light-dark cycle and provided tap water and sterile CE-2 pellets (CLEA Japan Inc., Tokyo, Japan) ad libitum. Aeroxide® P25 titanium dioxide (TiO2-P25) was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA).

Preparation of the TiO2 NP suspension and its administration to mice

The TiO2-P25 suspension was prepared as previously described [17]. Eight-week-old male gpt delta mice were randomly divided into four groups, with 6 mice per group. Mice were administrated by tail vein injection with the TiO2-P25 NP suspension at doses of 2, 10, and 50 mg/kg body weight once a week for 4 consecutive weeks. Mice were euthanized on day 90 after the final injection of TiO2-P25. Portions of the middle liver lobe were removed for gpt and Spi− mutation assays, quantification of titanium by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), and observation of TiO2-P25 particles by transmission electron microscopy (TEM).

gpt and Spi− mutation assay

The gpt and Spi− mutation assays were conducted as previously described [17].

Quantification of titanium in the liver by ICP-MS

Liver samples were weighed and digested with nitric acid and hydrogen peroxide. The concentration of titanium in each sample was measured using ICP-MS (Agilent7900 ICP-MS, Agilent Technologies, Tokyo, Japan). The titanium concentration was determined at the mass number of 47 m/z as previously reported [27].

Observation of hepatocyte ultrastructure by TEM

Liver samples taken at day 90 after the final injection of TiO2-P25 were analyzed using a JEM-2100F transmission electron microscope (JEOL, Tokyo, Japan) as previously described [17].

Statistical analysis

Statistical significance was examined using Dunnett’s test after one-way ANOVA. Values of P < 0.05 were considered significant.

Results

Characterization of TiO2 suspensions

TiO2-P25 was dispersed in disodium phosphate by sonication, as previously reported [17], then diluted to the concentration corresponding to each dose. The hydrodynamic sizes of TiO2-P25 in these diluents were measured each time before the injection by dynamic light scattering, and the average of four time determinations was showed in Table 1. The Z-average of the TiO2-P25 particles in suspension was about 150 d.nm, regardless of the different concentrations in these diluents.

Table 1 Agglomeration sizes of different concentrations of TiO2-P25 suspensions in 2 mg/mL disodium phosphate
Full size table

General observations of the animals

The body weight of mice in each group did not differ at weekly measurement for the first 4 weeks and thereafter to the end of the experiment (data not shown). However, one mouse was dead immediately after the injection at the third week, but the cause for the death could not be identified. Some of the mice got astounded for a short time immediately after the injection, but the mice in all groups were basically not found with abnormal behaviors and appearance.

Mutation frequencies of gpt and Spi− in the liver

The gpt and Spi− mutation frequencies in the liver were determined on day 90 after the last administration of TiO2-P25 (Tables 2 and 3). Either the gpt or Spi− mutation frequencies were not significantly different between the vehicle control group and TiO2 administration groups at any dose. These results suggest that TiO2-P25 has no mutagenic effect on hepatocytes in mice at 90 d after the last administration.

Table 2 The gpt mutation frequency in the livers of mice administered TiO2-P25 90 days after the last administration
Full size table
Table 3 The Spi− mutant frequency in the livers of mice administered TiO2-P25 90 d after the last administration
Full size table

Quantification and localization of TiO2 NPs in the liver

The amount of titanium in the liver of mice administered TiO2-P25 was quantified via ICP-MS. The average amount of titanium in the liver was dose dependent (Table 4). To clarify the localization of TiO2 particles, liver sections were obtained from mice treated with 50 mg/kg TiO2-P25, and the sections were observed by TEM. Large clusters containing the TiO2 NPs were found in the parenchymal hepatocytes (Fig. 1c) and Kupffer cells (Fig. 1d), although the clusters were much more prevalent in the latter. The particles were extremely agglomerated within the cytoplasm of both cell types. These results indicate that TiO2 NPs remained in the liver 90 d after the last injection and were mainly localized in the cytoplasm of Kupffer cells.

Table 4 The amount of titanium in the livers of mice administered TiO2-P25 90 days after the last administration
Full size table
Fig. 1
figure 1

Transmission electron microscope images of mice liver. a and b, parenchymal hepatocyte and phagocyte, respectively, from the liver of control mice, and c and d, parenchymal hepatocyte and phagocyte, respectively, from mice administered with 50 mg/kg TiO2-P25. * Photo B was from a control mouse in the short period experiment with TiO2-P25 (Ref. no.17)

Full size image

Discussion

TiO2 NPs have been classified as an IARC Group 2B potential carcinogen. Therefore, their genotoxicity is an important property for risk assessment. Several in vivo studies related to genotoxic effects of TiO2 NPs have been reported, but their results are inconsistent [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17]. Almost all of these reports analyzed the micronuclei and DNA damage by the comet assay, which reveals transient genotoxic consequences that occur shortly after exposure. In addition, the mutagenicity in TiO2-accumulating tissues such as the liver and spleen has been examined in transgenic mice for a relatively brief period [8, 17]. Thus, the long-term mutagenic effects of TiO2 NPs remain unclear. In this study, long-term genotoxic effects were examined in the liver of mice intravenously administered TiO2 NPs.

Recently, we reported that TiO2-P25 exhibits no mutagenicity in the liver of mice 9 d after the final injection based on gpt and Spi− mutation assays [17]. However, TiO2 NPs translocated to the liver are known to accumulate for a long period [22,23,24,25]. Thus, we have examined the mutagenicity of TiO2-P25 in the liver of long-term housed mice after the last administration. TiO2-P25 caused no mutagenic effects in the liver 90 d after the final injection, even though the particles were observed in the liver cells. The state of the cells that incorporated TiO2 NPs after 90 d seemed mostly unchanged compared to that after 9 d [17]. In addition, the amount of titanium in the liver at 90 d after the last administration was similar to that at 9 d [17]. This result indicates that TiO2 NPs are not easily removed from the liver, even after a long period, but their presence does not cause any adverse effects.

There were a few in vivo studies reported the positive genotoxic effect of TiO2-NPs. For example, TiO2 (Aeroxide P25®) (same material as used in our present study) induced micronuclei and DNA strand breaks in peripheral blood in adult male mice exposed to 500 mg/kg TiO2 NPs of 21 nm size through drinking water for 5 d [14], but the effect was not analyzed in liver. With the same material and intravenous injection route, Dobrzynska et al [4] detected increase of micronuclei in bone marrow polychromatic erythrocytes of mice only at 24 h but not later at 7 and 28 d. Modrzynska et al [28] investigated the DNA strand breaks in the liver of mice treated with TiO2 NPs (NanoAmor, 10.5 nm) by intratracheal instillation, intravenous injection or oral gavage at a single dose of 162 μg/mouse, and did not find DNA damages in liver tissue on day 1, 28 or 180 after the exposure by any administration routes, though there was a significant increase in the level of DNA damages in lung tissue on day 180 following intratracheal instillation. These reports suggested that TiO2 NPs may induce transient DNA damages in tissue such as blood cells, but not in liver. The endpoint of genotoxicity in this study was gene mutations, which are basically not repairable and could indicate the long term effect. The negative findings in this study are supported by many other reports [6,7,8,9, 12, 28]. It is known that physicochemical characteristics (primary size, shape, etc.) and study designs (dose, dispersion method, recovery time, models) can influence the toxicity of nanoparticles in the assay system. More studies with different TiO2 NPs are needed to better understand the health effects of this new material.

Conclusion

TiO2 NPs accumulate in the liver cells for long term. However, they do not induce genotoxic effect in the tissue. Therefore, the long-term genotoxic effects of TiO2 NPs administered by inhalation and ingestion which may introduce a small portion of the particles into liver, may be negligible in the liver.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated and /or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Change history

  • 03 March 2020

    In the original publication of this article [1], the author made a correction but wasn’t carried out.

References

  1. Heinrich U, Fuhst R, Rittinghausen S, Creutzenberg O, Bellmann B, Koch W, Levsen K. Chronic inhalation exposure of Wistar rats and two different strains of mice to diesel engine exhaust, carbon black, and titanium dioxide. Inhal Toxicol. 1995;7:533–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. IARC. IARC monographs on evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans, carbon black, titanium dioxide, and talc, vol. 93. France: Lyon; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Chen Z, Wang Y, Ba T, Li Y, Pu J, Chen T, Song Y, Gu Y, Qian Q, Yang J, Jia G. Genotoxic evaluation of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in vivo and in vitro. Toxicol Lett. 2014;226:314–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Dobrzynska MM, Gajowik A, Radzikowska J, Lankoff A, Dusinska M, Kruszewski M. Genotoxicity of silver and titanium dioxide nanoparticles in bone marrow cells of rats in vivo. Toxicology. 2014;315:86–91.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Hwang YJ, Jeung YS, Seo MH, Yoon JY, Kim DK, Park JW, Han JH, Jeong SH. Asian dust and titanium dioxide particles-induced inflammation and oxidative DNA damage in C57BL/6 mice. Inhal Toxicol. 2010;22:1127–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Landsiedel R, Ma-Hock L, Van Ravenzwaay B, Schulz M, Wiench K, Champ S, Schulte S, Wohlleben W, Oesch F. Gene toxicity studies on titanium dioxide and zinc oxide nanomaterials used for UV-protection in cosmetic formulations. Nanotoxicology. 2010;4:364–81.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lindberg HK, Falck GC, Catalan J, Koivisto AJ, Suhonen S, Jarventaus H, Rossi EM, Nykasenoja H, Peltonen Y, Moreno C, Alenius H, Tuomi T, Savolainen KM, Norppa H. Genotoxicity of inhaled nanosized TiO (2) in mice. Mutat Res. 2012;745:58–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Louro H, Tavares A, Vital N, Costa PM, Alverca E, Zwart E, de Jong WH, Fessard V, Lavinha J, Silva MJ. Integrated approach to the in vivo genotoxic effects of a titanium dioxide nanomaterial using LacZ plasmid-based transgenic mice. Environ Mol Mutagen. 2014;55:500–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Naya M, Kobayashi N, Ema M, Kasamoto S, Fukumuro M, Takami S, Nakajima M, Hayashi M, Nakanishi J. In vivo genotoxicity study of titanium dioxide nanoparticles using comet assay following intratracheal instillation in rats. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2012;62:1–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Saber AT, Jacobsen NR, Mortensen A, Szarek J, Jackson P, Madsen AM, Jensen KA, Koponen IK, Brunborg G, Gutzkow KB, Vogel U, Wallin H. Nanotitanium dioxide toxicity in mouse lung is reduced in sanding dust from paint. Part Fibre Toxicol. 2012;9:4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Saber AT, Jensen KA, Jacobsen NR, Birkedal R, Mikkelsen L, Moller P, Loft S, Wallin H, Vogel U. Inflammatory and genotoxic effects of nanoparticles designed for inclusion in paints and lacquers. Nanotoxicology. 2012;6:453–71.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Sadiq R, Bhalli JA, Yan J, Woodruff RS, Pearce MG, Li Y, Mustafa T, Watanabe F, Pack LM, Biris AS, Khan QM, Chen T. Genotoxicity of TiO (2) anatase nanoparticles in B6C3F1 male mice evaluated using pig-a and flow cytometric micronucleus assays. Mutat Res. 2012;745:65–72.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sycheva LP, Zhurkov VS, Iurchenko VV, Daugel-Dauge NO, Kovalenko MA, Krivtsova EK, Durnev AD. Investigation of genotoxic and cytotoxic effects of micro- and nanosized titanium dioxide in six organs of mice in vivo. Mutat Res. 2011;716:8–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Trouiller B, Reliene R, Westbrook A, Solaimani P, Schiestl RH. Titanium dioxide nanoparticles induce DNA damage and genetic instability in vivo in mice. Cancer Res. 2009;69:8784–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Donner EM, Myhre A, Brown SC, Boatman R, Warheit DB. In vivo micronucleus studies with 6 titanium dioxide materials (3 pigment-grade & 3 nanoscale) in orally-exposed rats. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2016;74:64–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Grissa I, Elghoul J, Ezzi L, Chakroun S, Kerkeni E, Hassine M, El Mir L, Mehdi M, Ben Cheikh H, Haouas Z. Anemia and genotoxicity induced by sub-chronic intragastric treatment of rats with titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen. 2015;794:25–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Suzuki T, Miura N, Hojo R, Yanagiba Y, Suda M, Hasegawa H, Miyagawa M, Wang RS. Genotoxicity assessment of intravenously injected titanium dioxide nanoparticles in gpt delta transgenic mice. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen. 2016;802:30–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kazimirova A, Baranokova M, Staruchova M, Drlickova M, Volkovova K, Dusinska M. Titanium dioxide nanoparticles tested for genotoxicity with the comet and micronucleus assays in vitro, ex vivo and in vivo. Mutat Res. 2019;843:57–65.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Gea M, Bonetta S, Iannarelli L, Giovannozzi AM, Maurino V, Bonetta S, Hodoroaba VD, Armato C, Rossi AM, Schilirò T. Shape-engineered titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2-NPs): cytotoxicity and genotoxicity in bronchial epithelial cells. Food Chem Toxicol. 2019;127:89–100.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Charles S, Jomini S, Fessard V, Bigorgne-Vizade E, Rousselle C, Michel C. Assessment of the in vitro genotoxicity of TiO2 nanoparticles in a regulatory context. Nanotoxicology. 2018;12:357–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Møller P, Jensen DM, Wils RS, Andersen MHG, Danielsen PH, Roursgaard M. Assessment of evidence for nanosized titanium dioxide-generated DNA strand breaks and oxidatively damaged DNA in cells and animal models. Nanotoxicology. 2017;11:1237–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fabian E, Landsiedel R, Ma-Hock L, Wiench K, Wohlleben W, van Ravenzwaay B. Tissue distribution and toxicity of intravenously administered titanium dioxide nanoparticles in rats. Arch Toxicol. 2008;82:151–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sugibayashi K, Todo H, Kimura E. Safety evaluation of titanium dioxide nanoparticles by their absorption and elimination profiles. J Toxicol Sci. 2008;33:293–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Umbreit TH, Francke-Carroll S, Weaver JL, Miller TJ, Goering PL, Sadrieh N, Stratmeyer ME. Tissue distribution and histopathological effects of titanium dioxide nanoparticles after intravenous or subcutaneous injection in mice. J Appl Toxicol. 2012;32:350–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Xie G, Wang C, Sun J, Zhong G. Tissue distribution and excretion of intravenously administered titanium dioxide nanoparticles. Toxicol Lett. 2011;205:55–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Nohmi T, Katoh M, Suzuki H, Matsui M, Yamada M, Watanabe M, Suzuki M, Horiya N, Ueda O, Shibuya T, Ikeda H, Sofuni T. A new transgenic mouse mutagenesis test system using Spi- and 6-thioguanine selections. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1996;28:465–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Miura N, Ohtani K, Hasegawa T, Yoshioka H, Hwang GW. High sensitivity of testicular function to titanium nanoparticles. J Toxicol Sci. 2017;42:359–66.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Modrzynska J, Berthing T, Ravn-Haren G, Jacobsen NR, Weydahl IK, Loeschner K, Mortensen A, Saber AT, Vogel U. Primary genotoxicity in the liver following pulmonary exposure to carbon black nanoparticles in mice. Part Fibre Toxicol. 2018;15:2–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are deeply grateful to Dr. Masumura, Division of Genetics and Mutagenesis, National Institute of Health Sciences, Kawasaki, Japan, for providing the E. coli strains for gpt and Spi- mutation assays.

Funding

This study was funded by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Japan (N-P24–02).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Industrial Toxicology and Health Effects Research, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, 6-21-1 Nagao, Tama-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa, 214-8585, Japan

    Tetsuya Suzuki, Nobuhiko Miura, Rieko Hojo, Yukie Yanagiba, Megumi Suda, Muneyuki Miyagawa & Rui-Sheng Wang

  2. Present address: Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, 734-8553, Japan

    Tetsuya Suzuki

  3. Present Address: Department of Health Science, Yokohama University of Pharmacy, Yokohama, 245-0066, Japan

    Nobuhiko Miura

  4. Division of Human Environmental Science, Mount Fuji Research Institute, Yamanashi Prefectural Government, 5597-1 Kenmarubi, Kamiyoshida, Fujiyoshida, Yamanashi, 403-0005, Japan

    Tatsuya Hasegawa

  5. Present Address: Department of Sport and Medical Science, Faculty of Medical Technology, Teikyo University, Hachioji, Tokyo, 192-0835, Japan

    Muneyuki Miyagawa

Authors
  1. Tetsuya Suzuki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nobuhiko Miura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rieko Hojo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yukie Yanagiba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Megumi Suda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Tatsuya Hasegawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Muneyuki Miyagawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Rui-Sheng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

TS, NM, RH, YY, MS, TH and RSW were involved in data collection. TS and RSW contributed to analyzing the data and drafting the manuscript. MM and RSW contributed to the data interpretation. All authors approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rui-Sheng Wang.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The animal experiments was approved as stated in the “Animals and reagents”.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original version of this article was revised: The (Fig. 1b) in sentence “Large clusters containing the TiO NPs were found in the parenchymal hepatocytes (Fig. 1c) and Kupffer cells (Fig. 1b), although the clusters were much more” should be (Fig. 1d).

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Suzuki, T., Miura, N., Hojo, R. et al. Genotoxicity assessment of titanium dioxide nanoparticle accumulation of 90 days in the liver of gpt delta transgenic mice. Genes and Environ 42, 7 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41021-020-0146-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41021-020-0146-3

Keywords

Genes and Environment

ISSN: 1880-7062

Contact us