journal article·2023-08

Machine learning-assisted prediction of the toxicity of silver nanoparticles: a meta-analysis

Eyup Bilgi, Ceyda Oksel Karakus

Journal of Nanoparticle Research· Volume 25· Issue 8
Publisher page

Abstract

Silver nanoparticles are likely to be more dangerous than other forms of silver due to the intracellular release of silver ions upon dissolution and the formation of mixed ion-containing complexes. Such concerns have resulted in an ever-growing pile of scientific evaluations addressing the safety aspects of nanosilver with widely varying methodological approaches. The substantial differences in the conduct/design of nanotoxicity screening have led to the generation of conflicting findings that may be accurate in their narrative but fail to provide a complete picture. One strategy to maximize the use of individual risk assessments with potentially biased estimates of toxicological effects is to homogenize results across several studies and to increase the generalizability and human relevance of their findings. Here, we collected a large pool of data (n=162 independent studies) on the cytotoxicity of nanosilver and unrevealed potential triggers of toxicity. Two different machine learning approaches, decision tree (DT) and artificial neural network (ANN), were primarily employed to develop models that can predict the cytotoxic potential of nanosilver based on material- and assay-related parameters. Other machine learning algorithms (logistic regression, Gaussian Naive Bayes, k-nearest neighbor, and random forest classifiers) were also applied. Among several attributes compared, exposure concentration, duration, zeta potential, particle size, and coating were found to have the most substantial impact on nanotoxicity, with biomolecule- and microorganism-assisted surface modifications having the most beneficial and detrimental effects on cell survival, respectively. Such machine learning-assisted efforts are critical to developing commercially viable and safe nanosilver-containing products in the ever-expanding nanobiomaterial market.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Nanoparticles: synthesis and applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (50)

Show source-provided references
1. Hulla J, Sahu S, Hayes A (2015) Nanotechnology: history and future. Hum Exp Toxicol 34(12):1318–132110.1177/0960327115603588 ↗
2. Park B (2007) Current and future applications of nanotechnology. Issues Environ Sci Technol 24:1–19
3. Eigler DM, Schweizer EK (1990) Positioning single atoms with a scanning tunnelling microscope. Nature 344(6266):524–52610.1038/344524a0 ↗
4. Mobasser S, Firoozi AA (2016) Review of nanotechnology applications in science and engineering. J Civil Eng Urban 6(4):84–93
5. Oksel Karakus C, Bilgi E, Winkler DA (2021) Biomedical nanomaterials: applications, toxicological concerns, and regulatory needs. Nanotoxicology 15(3):331–35110.1080/17435390.2020.1860265 ↗
6. Jagaran K, Singh M (2021) Nanomedicine for neurodegenerative disorders: Focus on Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases. Int J Mol Sci 22(16):908210.3390/ijms22169082 ↗
7. Reidy B et al (2013) Mechanisms of silver nanoparticle release, transformation and toxicity: a critical review of current knowledge and recommendations for future studies and applications. Materials 6(6):2295–235010.3390/ma6062295 ↗
8. Clement JL, Jarrett PS (1994) Antibacterial silver. Metal-based Drugs 1(5-6):467–48210.1155/MBD.1994.467 ↗
9. Martínez-Gutierrez F et al (2012) Antibacterial activity, inflammatory response, coagulation and cytotoxicity effects of silver nanoparticles. Nanomed: Nanotechnol, Biol Med 8(3):328–33610.1016/j.nano.2011.06.014 ↗
10. Ferdous Z, Nemmar A (2020) Health impact of silver nanoparticles: a review of the biodistribution and toxicity following various routes of exposure. Int J Mol Sci 21(7):237510.3390/ijms21072375 ↗
11. Stensberg MC et al (2011) Toxicological studies on silver nanoparticles: challenges and opportunities in assessment, monitoring and imaging. Nanomedicine 6(5):879–89810.2217/nnm.11.78 ↗
12. Liao C, Li Y, Tjong SC (2019) Bactericidal and cytotoxic properties of silver nanoparticles. Int J Mol Sci 20(2):44910.3390/ijms20020449 ↗
13. Zhang T et al (2014) Cytotoxic potential of silver nanoparticles. Yonsei Med J 55(2):283–29110.3349/ymj.2014.55.2.283 ↗
14. Freshney RI (2005) Cytotoxicity. In: Culture of animal cells: a manual of basic techniques, 5th edn. John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 359–37610.1002/0471747599.cac022 ↗
15. Lewinski N, Colvin V, Drezek R (2008) Cytotoxicity of nanoparticles. Small 4(1):26–4910.1002/smll.200700595 ↗
16. Ahmed KBR et al (2017) Silver nanoparticles: significance of physicochemical properties and assay interference on the interpretation of in vitro cytotoxicity studies. Toxicol Vitro 38:179–19210.1016/j.tiv.2016.10.012 ↗
17. Mello DF et al (2020) Caveats to the use of MTT, neutral red, Hoechst and Resazurin to measure silver nanoparticle cytotoxicity. Chem-biol Interact 315:10886810.1016/j.cbi.2019.108868 ↗
18. Gu Q et al (2019) An alternative in vitro method for examining nanoparticle-induced cytotoxicity. Int Toxicol 38(5):385–39410.1177/1091581819859267 ↗
19. Oh S-J et al (2014) Incompatibility of silver nanoparticles with lactate dehydrogenase leakage assay for cellular viability test is attributed to protein binding and reactive oxygen species generation. Toxicol Lett 225(3):422–43210.1016/j.toxlet.2014.01.015 ↗
20. Liang L et al (2015) Nanoparticles' interference in the evaluation of in vitro toxicity of silver nanoparticles. RSC Adv 5(82):67327–6733410.1039/C5RA05863E ↗
21. Karakus CO, Winkler DA (2021) Overcoming roadblocks in computational roadmaps to the future for safe nanotechnology. Nano Futures 5(2):02200210.1088/2399-1984/abe560 ↗
22. Semenzin E et al (2019) Controlling the risks of nano-enabled products through the life cycle: the case of nano copper oxide paint for wood protection and nano-pigments used in the automotive industry. Environ Int 131:10490110.1016/j.envint.2019.06.011 ↗
23. Oksel C et al (2015) (Q) SAR modelling of nanomaterial toxicity: a critical review. Particuology 21:1–1910.1016/j.partic.2014.12.001 ↗
24. Tran L, Bañares MA, Rallo R (2017) Modelling the toxicity of nanoparticles. Springer International Publishing, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47754-110.1007/978-3-319-47754-1 ↗
25. Labouta HI et al (2019) Meta-analysis of nanoparticle cytotoxicity via data-mining the literature. ACS nano 13(2):1583–1594
26. Liu L et al (2021) Cytotoxicity of phytosynthesized silver nanoparticles: a meta-analysis by machine learning algorithms. Sustain Chem Pharm 21:10042510.1016/j.scp.2021.100425 ↗
27. Sharma H, Kumar S (2016) A survey on decision tree algorithms of classification in data mining. Int J Sci Res 5(4):2094–2097
28. Gupta B et al (2017) Analysis of various decision tree algorithms for classification in data mining. Int J Comput Appl 163(8):15–19
29. Hao J, Ho TK (2019) Machine learning made easy: a review of scikit-learn package in python programming language. J Educ Behav Stat 44(3):348–36110.3102/1076998619832248 ↗
30. Kramer O (2016) Scikit-Learn. In: Machine learning for evolution strategies. Studies in big data, vol 20. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33383-0_510.1007/978-3-319-33383-0_5 ↗
31. Yuan Y, Wu L, Zhang X (2021) Gini-impurity index analysis. IEEE Trans Inf Forensics Secur 16:3154–316910.1109/TIFS.2021.3076932 ↗
32. Wang SC (2003) Artificial neural network. In: Interdisciplinary computing in java programming. The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science, vol 743. Springer, Boston. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0377-4_510.1007/978-1-4615-0377-4_5 ↗
33. Jain AK, Mao J, Mohiuddin KM (1996) Artificial neural networks: A tutorial. Computer 29(3):31–4410.1109/2.485891 ↗
34. Krogh A (2008) What are artificial neural networks? Nat Biotechnol 26(2):195–19710.1038/nbt1386 ↗
35. Uzair M, Jamil N (2020) Effects of hidden layers on the efficiency of neural networks. In: 2020 IEEE 23rd International Multitopic Conference (INMIC), Bahawalpur, Pakistan, pp 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/INMIC50486.2020.9318195.10.1109/INMIC50486.2020.9318195 ↗
36. Stathakis D (2009) How many hidden layers and nodes? Int J Remote Sens 30(8):2133–214710.1080/01431160802549278 ↗
37. Richardson JT (2011) Eta squared and partial eta squared as measures of effect size in educational research. Educ Res Rev 6(2):135–14710.1016/j.edurev.2010.12.001 ↗
38. Byrd J, Lipton Z (2019) What is the effect of importance weighting in deep learning? Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning. In: Proceedings of Machine Learning Research 97:872–881. Available from https://proceedings.mlr.press/v97/byrd19a.html
39. Le TT, Moore JH (2021) treeheatr: an R package for interpretable decision tree visualizations. Bioinformatics 37(2):282–284. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btaa66210.1093/bioinformatics/btaa662 ↗
40. O'Driscoll R et al (2021) Comparison of the validity and generalizability of machine learning algorithms for the prediction of energy expenditure: validation study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 9(8):e2393810.2196/23938 ↗
41. Wolpert DH, Macready WG (1997) No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 1(1):67–8210.1109/4235.585893 ↗
42. Stephens D, Diesing M (2014) A comparison of supervised classification methods for the prediction of substrate type using multibeam acoustic and legacy grain-size data. PloS one 9(4):e9395010.1371/journal.pone.0093950 ↗
43. Wang S et al (2020) A new method of diesel fuel brands identification: SMOTE oversampling combined with XGBoost ensemble learning. Fuel 282:11884810.1016/j.fuel.2020.118848 ↗
44. He Z et al (2021) A combination of expert-based system and advanced decision-tree algorithms to predict air-overpressure resulting from quarry blasting. Nat Resour Res 30:1889–190310.1007/s11053-020-09773-6 ↗
45. Akhter MH et al (2021) Impact of protein corona on the biological identity of nanomedicine: understanding the fate of nanomaterials in the biological milieu. Biomedicines 9(10):149610.3390/biomedicines9101496 ↗
46. Tantra R et al (2015) A method for assessing nanomaterial dispersion quality based on principal component analysis of particle size distribution data. Particuology 22:30–3810.1016/j.partic.2014.10.004 ↗
47. Oberdörster G et al (2005) Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: elements of a screening strategy. Part Fibre Toxicol 2(1):1–3510.1186/1743-8977-2-8 ↗
48. Oksel C et al (2016) Evaluation of existing control measures in reducing health and safety risks of engineered nanomaterials. Environ Sci: Nano 3 (4):869–882
49. Kad A et al (2022) Meta-analysis of in-vitro cytotoxicity evaluation studies of zinc oxide nanoparticles: paving way for safer innovations. Toxicol Vitro:10541810.1016/j.tiv.2022.105418 ↗
50. Shirokii N, Din Y, Petrov I, Seregin Y, Sirotenko S, Razlivina J, Serov N, Vinogradov V (2023) Quantitative prediction of inorganic nanomaterial cellular toxicity via machine learning. Small. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.20220710610.1002/smll.202207106 ↗