Metabolomic effects of CeO2, SiO2 and CuO metal oxide nanomaterials on HepG2 cells

Kirk T. Kitchin,Steve Stirdivant,Brian L. Robinette,Benjamin T. Castellon,Xinhua Liang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12989-017-0230-4

2017-11-29

Particle and Fibre Toxicology

Abstract:BackgroundTo better assess potential hepatotoxicity of nanomaterials, human liver HepG2 cells were exposed for 3 days to five different CeO2 (either 30 or 100 μg/ml), 3 SiO2 based (30 μg/ml) or 1 CuO (3 μg/ml) nanomaterials with dry primary particle sizes ranging from 15 to 213 nm. Metabolomic assessment of exposed cells was then performed using four mass spectroscopy dependent platforms (LC and GC), finding 344 biochemicals.ResultsFour CeO2, 1 SiO2 and 1 CuO nanomaterials increased hepatocyte concentrations of many lipids, particularly free fatty acids and monoacylglycerols but only CuO elevated lysolipids and sphingolipids. In respect to structure-activity, we now know that five out of six tested CeO2, and both SiO2 and CuO, but zero out of four TiO2 nanomaterials have caused this elevated lipids effect in HepG2 cells. Observed decreases in UDP-glucuronate (by CeO2) and S-adenosylmethionine (by CeO2 and CuO) and increased S-adenosylhomocysteine (by CuO and some CeO2) suggest that a nanomaterial exposure increases transmethylation reactions and depletes hepatic methylation and glucuronidation capacity. Our metabolomics data suggests increased free radical attack on nucleotides. There was a clear pattern of nanomaterial-induced decreased nucleotide concentrations coupled with increased concentrations of nucleic acid degradation products. Purine and pyrimidine alterations included concentration increases for hypoxanthine, xanthine, allantoin, urate, inosine, adenosine 3′,5′-diphosphate, cytidine and thymidine while decreases were seen for uridine 5′-diphosphate, UDP-glucuronate, uridine 5′-monophosphate, adenosine 5′-diphosphate, adenosine 5′-monophophate, cytidine 5′-monophosphate and cytidine 3′-monophosphate. Observed depletions of both 6-phosphogluconate, NADPH and NADH (all by CeO2) suggest that the HepG2 cells may be deficient in reducing equivalents and thus in a state of oxidative stress.ConclusionsMetal oxide nanomaterial exposure may compromise the methylation, glucuronidation and reduced glutathione conjugation systems; thus Phase II conjugational capacity of hepatocytes may be decreased. This metabolomics study of the effects of nine different nanomaterials has not only confirmed some observations of the prior 2014 study (lipid elevations caused by one CeO2 nanomaterial) but also found some entirely new effects (both SiO2 and CuO nanomaterials also increased the concentrations of several lipid classes, nanomaterial induced decreases in S-adenosylmethionine, UDP-glucuronate, dipeptides, 6-phosphogluconate, NADPH and NADH).

toxicology

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to evaluate the potential hepatotoxic effects of different metal oxide nanomaterials (such as CeO_2, SiO_2 and CuO) on human liver cells HepG2. Specifically, the study explored the effects of these nanomaterials on metabolite concentrations in HepG2 cells through metabolomics methods, especially the changes in metabolites such as lipids, energy molecules, amino acids, peptides, carbohydrates, purines, pyrimidines and nucleotides. The main objectives of the study include:

1. **Verify and further explore previous findings**: The increase in lipids (such as fatty acids) caused by a CeO_2 nanomaterial, and the decrease in glutathione and γ - glutamyl amino acids caused by multiple metal oxide nanomaterials (CeO_2 and TiO_2).
2. **Explore the effects of new metal oxide nanomaterials**: In particular, the metabolomics effects of two new nanomaterials based on SiO_2 and CuO.
3. **Discover possible functional detection indicators**: These indicators can serve as an intermediate link connecting the physicochemical properties of nanomaterials and the final toxicity, supporting the development of adverse outcome pathway models to better predict risks.

Through these studies, the authors hope to better understand the specific effects of nanomaterials on liver cells, thereby providing a scientific basis for the safe use of nanomaterials.