Improving the dichloro-dihydro-fluorescein (DCFH) assay for the assessment of intracellular reactive oxygen species formation by nanomaterials.

To facilitate Safe and Sustainable by Design (SSbD) strategies during the development of nanomaterials (NMs), quick and easy in vitro assays to test for hazard potential at an early stage of NM development are essential. The formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and the induction of oxidative stress are considered important mechanisms that can lead to NM toxicity. In vitro assays measuring oxidative stress are therefore commonly included in NM hazard assessment strategies. The fluorescence-based dichloro-dihydro-fluorescein (DCFH) assay for cellular oxidative stress is a simple and cost-effective assay, making it a good candidate assay for SSbD hazard testing strategies. It is however subject to several pitfalls and caveats. Here, we provide further optimizations to the assay using 5-(6)-Chloromethyl-2',7'-dichlorodihydrofluorescein diacetate acetyl ester (CM-H2DCFDA-AE, referred to as DCFH probe), known for its improved cell retention. We measured the release of metabolic products of the DCFH probe from cells to supernatant, direct reactions of CM-H2DCFDA-AE with positive controls, and compared the commonly used plate reader-based DCFH assay protocol with fluorescence microscopy and flow cytometry-based protocols. After loading cells with DCFH probe, translocation of several metabolic products of the DCFH probe to the supernatant was observed in multiple cell types. Translocated DCFH products are then able to react with test substances including positive controls. Our results also indicate that intracellularly oxidized fluorescent DCF is able to translocate from cells to the supernatant. In either way, this will lead to a fluorescent supernatant, making it difficult to discriminate between intra- and extra-cellular ROS production, risking misinterpretation of possible oxidative stress when measuring fluorescence on a plate reader. The use of flow cytometry instead of plate reader-based measurements resolved these issues, and also improved assay sensitivity. Several optimizations of the flow cytometry-based DCFH ISO standard (ISO/TS 19006:2016) were suggested, including loading cells with DCFH probe before incubation with the test materials, and applying an appropriate gating strategy including live-death staining, which was not included in the ISO standard. In conclusion, flow cytometry- and fluorescence microscopy-based read-outs are preferred over the classical plate reader-based read-out to assess the level of intracellular oxidative stress using the cellular DCFH assay.

The State of the Art and Challenges of In Vitro Methods for Human Hazard Assessment of Nanomaterials in the Context of Safe-by-Design.

The Safe-by-Design (SbD) concept aims to facilitate the development of safer materials/products, safer production, and safer use and end-of-life by performing timely SbD interventions to reduce hazard, exposure, or both. Early hazard screening is a crucial first step in this process. In this review, for the first time, commonly used in vitro assays are evaluated for their suitability for SbD hazard testing of nanomaterials (NMs). The goal of SbD hazard testing is identifying hazard warnings in the early stages of innovation. For this purpose, assays should be simple, cost-effective, predictive, robust, and compatible. For several toxicological endpoints, there are indications that commonly used in vitro assays are able to predict hazard warnings. In addition to the evaluation of assays, this review provides insights into the effects of the choice of cell type, exposure and dispersion protocol, and the (in)accurate determination of dose delivered to cells on predictivity. Furthermore, compatibility of assays with challenging advanced materials and NMs released from nano-enabled products (NEPs) during the lifecycle is assessed, as these aspects are crucial for SbD hazard testing. To conclude, hazard screening of NMs is complex and joint efforts between innovators, scientists, and regulators are needed to further improve SbD hazard testing.