Analysis of carbon nanotube levels in organic matter: an inter-laboratory comparison to determine best practice
Jérôme Devoy,Souhail Al-Abed,Benjamin Cerdan,Wan-Seob Cho,David Dubuc,Emmanuel Flahaut,Katia Grenier,Stéphane Grossmann,Mary Gulumian,Jiyoung Jeong,Boo Wook Kim,Adam Laycock,Jong Seong Lee,Rachel Smith,Mei Yang,Il Je Yu,Minfang Zhang,Frédéric Cosnier
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2024.2331683
2024-04-02
Nanotoxicology
Abstract:Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are increasingly being used in industrial applications, but their toxicological data in animals and humans are still sparse. To assess the toxicological dose-response of CNTs and to evaluate their pulmonary biopersistence, their quantification in tissues, especially lungs, is crucial. There are currently no reference methods or reference materials for low levels of CNTs in organic matter. Among existing analytical methods, few have been fully and properly validated. To remedy this, we undertook an inter-laboratory comparison on samples of freeze-dried pig lung, ground and doped with CNTs. Eight laboratories were enrolled to analyze 3 types of CNTs at 2 concentration levels each in this organic matrix. Associated with the different analysis techniques used (specific to each laboratory), sample preparation may or may not have involved prior digestion of the matrix, depending on the analysis technique and the material being analyzed. Overall, even challenging, laboratories' ability to quantify CNT levels in organic matter is demonstrated. However, CNT quantification is often overestimated. Trueness analysis identified effective methods, but systematic errors persisted for some. Choosing the assigned value proved complex. Indirect analysis methods, despite added steps, outperform direct methods. The study emphasizes the need for reference materials, enhanced precision, and organized comparisons.
toxicology,nanoscience & nanotechnology