↓ Skip to main content

Impact of copper oxide nanomaterials on differentiated and undifferentiated Caco-2 intestinal epithelial cells; assessment of cytotoxicity, barrier integrity, cytokine production and nanomaterial…

Overview of attention for article published in Particle and Fibre Toxicology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Impact of copper oxide nanomaterials on differentiated and undifferentiated Caco-2 intestinal epithelial cells; assessment of cytotoxicity, barrier integrity, cytokine production and nanomaterial penetration
Published in
Particle and Fibre Toxicology, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12989-017-0211-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Victor C. Ude, David M. Brown, Luca Viale, Nilesh Kanase, Vicki Stone, Helinor J. Johnston

Abstract

Copper oxide nanomaterials (CuO NMs) are exploited in a diverse array of products including antimicrobials, inks, cosmetics, textiles and food contact materials. There is therefore a need to assess the toxicity of CuO NMs to the gastrointestinal (GI) tract since exposure could occur via direct oral ingestion, mucocillary clearance (following inhalation) or hand to mouth contact. Undifferentiated Caco-2 intestinal cells were exposed to CuO NMs (10 nm) at concentrations ranging from 0.37 to 78.13 μg/cm2 Cu (equivalent to 1.95 to 250 μg/ml) and cell viability assessed 24 h post exposure using the alamar blue assay. The benchmark dose (BMD 20), determined using PROAST software, was identified as 4.44 μg/cm2 for CuO NMs, and 4.25 μg/cm2 for copper sulphate (CuSO4), which informed the selection of concentrations for further studies. The differentiation status of cells and the impact of CuO NMs and CuSO4 on the integrity of the differentiated Caco-2 cell monolayer were assessed by measurement of trans-epithelial electrical resistance (TEER), staining for Zonula occludens-1 (ZO-1) and imaging of cell morphology using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The impact of CuO NMs and CuSO4 on the viability of differentiated cells was performed via assessment of cell number (DAPI staining), and visualisation of cell morphology (light microscopy). Interleukin-8 (IL-8) production by undifferentiated and differentiated Caco-2 cells following exposure to CuO NMs and CuSO4 was determined using an ELISA. The copper concentration in the cell lysate, apical and basolateral compartments were measured with Inductive Coupled Plasma Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES) and used to calculate the apparent permeability coefficient (Papp); a measure of barrier permeability to CuO NMs. For all experiments, CuSO4 was used as an ionic control. CuO NMs and CuSO4 caused a concentration dependent decrease in cell viability in undifferentiated cells. CuO NMs and CuSO4 translocated across the differentiated Caco-2 cell monolayer. CuO NM mediated IL-8 production was over 2-fold higher in undifferentiated cells. A reduction in cell viability in differentiated cells was not responsible for the lower level of cytokine production observed. Both CuO NMs and CuSO4 decreased TEER values to a similar extent, and caused tight junction dysfunction (ZO-1 staining), suggesting that barrier integrity was disrupted. CuO NMs and CuSO4 stimulated IL-8 production by Caco-2 cells, decreased barrier integrity and thereby increased the Papp and translocation of Cu. There was no significant enhancement in potency of the CuO NMs compared to CuSO4. Differentiated Caco-2 cells were identified as a powerful model to assess the impacts of ingested NMs on the GI tract.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 18%
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 20 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 7%
Chemistry 5 6%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 26 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2017.
All research outputs
#20,444,703
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Particle and Fibre Toxicology
#463
of 561 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#277,186
of 317,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Particle and Fibre Toxicology
#14
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 561 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.