Search

Many components of the innate immune system are evolutionarily conserved and shared across many living organisms, from plants and invertebrates to humans. Therefore, these shared features can allow the comparative study of potentially dangerous substances, such as engineered nanoparticles (NPs). However, differences of methodology and procedure between diverse species and models make comparison of innate immune responses to NPs between organisms difficult in many cases. To this aim, this review provides an overview of suitable methods and assays that can be used to measure NP immune interactions across species in a multidisciplinary approach. The first part of this review describes the main innate immune defense characteristics of the selected models that can be associated to NPs exposure. In the second part, the different modes of exposure to NPs across models (considering isolated cells or whole organisms) and the main endpoints measured are discussed. In this synergistic perspective, we provide an overview of the current state of important cross-disciplinary immunological models to study NP-immune interactions and identify future research needs. As such, this paper could be used as a methodological reference point for future nano-immunosafety studies.

Dendritic cells (DCs) shape immune responses by influencing T-cell activation. Thus, they are considered both an interesting model for studying nano-immune interactions and a promising target for nano-based biomedical applications. However, the accentuated ability of nanoparticles (NPs) to interact with biomolecules may have an impact on DC function that poses an unexpected risk of unbalanced immune reactions. Here, we investigated the potential effects of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) on DC function and the consequences for effector and memory T-cell responses in the presence of the microbial inflammatory stimulus lipopolysaccharide (LPS). Overall, we found that, in the absence of LPS, none of the tested NPs induced a DC response. However, whereas 4-, 8-, and 11 nm AuNPs did not modulate LPS-dependent immune responses, 26 nm AuNPs shifted the phenotype of LPS-activated DCs toward a tolerogenic state, characterized by downregulation of CD86, IL-12 and IL-27, upregulation of ILT3, and induction of class E compartments. Moreover, this DC phenotype was less proficient in promoting Th1 activation and central memory T-cell proliferation. Taken together, these findings support the perception that AuNPs are safe under homeostatic conditions; however, particular care should be taken in patients experiencing a current infection or disorders of the immune system.

Many components of the innate immune system are evolutionarily conserved and shared across many living organisms, from plants and invertebrates to humans. Therefore, these shared features can allow the comparative study of potentially dangerous substances, such as engineered nanoparticles (NPs). However, differences of methodology and procedure between diverse species and models make comparison of innate immune responses to NPs between organisms difficult in many cases. To this aim, this review provides an overview of suitable methods and assays that can be used to measure NP immune interactions across species in a multidisciplinary approach. The first part of this review describes the main innate immune defense characteristics of the selected models that can be associated to NPs exposure. In the second part, the different modes of exposure to NPs across models (considering isolated cells or whole organisms) and the main endpoints measured are discussed. In this synergistic perspective, we provide an overview of the current state of important cross-disciplinary immunological models to study NP-immune interactions and identify future research needs. As such, this paper could be used as a methodological reference point for future nano-immunosafety studies.

The interaction of a living organism with external foreign agents is a central issue for its survival and adaptation to the environment. Nanosafety should be considered within this perspective, and it should be examined that how different organisms interact with engineered nanomaterials (NM) by either mounting a defensive response or by physiologically adapting to them. Herein, the interaction of NM with one of the major biological systems deputed to recognition of and response to foreign challenges, i.e., the immune system, is specifically addressed. The main focus is innate immunity, the only type of immunity in plants, invertebrates, and lower vertebrates, and that coexists with adaptive immunity in higher vertebrates. Because of their presence in the majority of eukaryotic living organisms, innate immune responses can be viewed in a comparative context. In the majority of cases, the interaction of NM with living organisms results in innate immune reactions that eliminate the possible danger with mechanisms that do not lead to damage. While in some cases such interaction may lead to pathological consequences, in some other cases beneficial effects can be identified.

The interaction of a living organism with external foreign agents is a central issue for its survival and adaptation to the environment. Nanosafety should be considered within this perspective, and it should be examined that how different organisms interact with engineered nanomaterials (NM) by either mounting a defensive response or by physiologically adapting to them. Herein, the interaction of NM with one of the major biological systems deputed to recognition of and response to foreign challenges, i.e., the immune system, is specifically addressed. The main focus is innate immunity, the only type of immunity in plants, invertebrates, and lower vertebrates, and that coexists with adaptive immunity in higher vertebrates. Because of their presence in the majority of eukaryotic living organisms, innate immune responses can be viewed in a comparative context. In the majority of cases, the interaction of NM with living organisms results in innate immune reactions that eliminate the possible danger with mechanisms that do not lead to damage. While in some cases such interaction may lead to pathological consequences, in some other cases beneficial effects can be identified.