, 2006). These studies highlight the need for undertaking further investigations on the antigenicity (capacity to evoke immune response) of nanoparticles per se and their complexes (with cellular biomolecules) as well as the resulting specific immune responses ( Curtis et al., 2006 and Lanone and Boczkowski, MEK inhibitor side effects 2006). Interactions of nanomaterials with eukaryotic cells have been recently reviewed by Shvedova et al. (2010) with reference to recognition of engineered nanomaterials by the immune system, and the operating primary

cellular defense mechanisms. As far as the safety aspects of nanomaterials are concerned; academia, industry and regulatory governmental agencies should consider the unique biological properties of nanomaterials, and the related potential risks (Curtis et al., 2006, Lanone and Boczkowski, 2006 and Nel et al., 2006). Multidisciplinary studies are encouraged to establish nanomaterials classification and testing procedures which would include toxicology, material science, medicine, molecular biology, and bioinformatics (Curtis et al., 2006 and Lanone and Boczkowski, 2006). Regulatory aspects on the

synthesis, use and disposal of nanoparticles are beyond the scope of this review. As with any other man-made materials, both in vitro and in vivo studies on biological effects of nanoparticles need to be performed. In vitro model systems provide a rapid and effective means to assess nanoparticles for a number Alanine-glyoxylate transaminase of toxicological endpoints. They also allow development of mechanism-driven

evaluations and provide refined information on selleckchem how nanoparticles interact with human cells in many ways. Such studies can be used to establish concentration–effect relationships and the effect-specific thresholds in cells. These assays are suited for high-throughput screening of an ever increasing number of new engineered nanomaterials obviating the need for in vivo testing of individual materials. They also serve as well defined systems for studying the structure–activity relationships involving nanomaterials. Some of the distinct advantages of in vitro systems using various cell lines include; (1) revelation of primary effects of target cells in the absence of secondary effects caused by inflammation; (2) identification of primary mechanisms of toxicity in the absence of the physiological and compensatory factors that confound the interpretation of whole animal studies; (3) efficiency, rapidity and cost-effectiveness; and (4) scope for improvements in design of subsequent expensive whole animal studies ( Huang et al., 2010). Other advantages such as reduction in variability between experiments; reduced requirement of test materials thereby leading to generation of limited amounts of toxic wastes; possibility of using transgenic cell lines carrying human genes etc.