
TROUBLING SIMILARITYThe resemblance between asbestos fibers (top) and some carbon nanotubes (below) has fostered concerns that nanotubes might exhibit asbestos-like toxicity.
K. Donaldson/ U. of Aberdeen
As the saying goes, if it looks like a duck and quacks like
a duck, it’s reasonable to assume it’s a duck. In light of a new rodent study,
environmental scientists worry that
the same might apply to asbestos.
Certain long carbon nanotubes — tiny cylinders only 20
micrometers long and perhaps a few micrometers wide — have the same basic
dimensions as toxic asbestos fibers. A broad body of data has suggested that
the damage caused by asbestos traces more
to its physical dimensions than its chemical recipe. So scientists had begun over
the past few years expressing concerns that long nanotubes could trigger characteristic
asbestos disease, especially mesothelioma — an unusual cancer that is nearly
always fatal.
Support for such concerns emerges in the new study, although the
study’s duration was too short and
its design too simplistic to prove such a link. For
instance, asbestos diseases develop slowly over many years, and this study
lasted only seven days. Asbestos diseases result from inhalation of toxic
mineral fibers, which over time migrate through the wall of the lung to produce
disease on the breathing organ’s
exterior surface. Here, the
researchers released the fibers into the abdomen, giving them direct access to
the lung’s exterior mesothelial
tissue, where mesothelioma develops.

PIERCEDNeedlelike fibers of asbestos (left) and long carbon nanotubes (right) penetrate through macrophages, the body’s trash collectors. An inability to fully engulf the fibers will cause these cells to die, fostering tissue-damaging inflammation.K. Donaldson/ U. of Aberdeen
Despite these caveats, long carbon nanotubes prompted
immediate inflammation and a rapid development of lesions in treated mice. Those
lesions, symptomatic of the body’s attempt to wall off persistent, irritating materials,
are an early — if nonspecific — symptom of asbestos toxicity. Administering long
asbestos fibers to mice caused these same responses. Injecting short asbestos fibers or
short or
tangled carbon nanotubes did not trigger these effects.
Toxicologists led by Craig A. Poland and his colleagues at
the University of
Edinburgh reported their findings at a news conference May 20.
Their data also have been posted in an online paper to appear soon in Nature Nanotechnology.
This study “is a long way” from showing that carbon
nanotubes can cause diseases characteristic of asbestos, such as mesothelioma, says
André E. Nel, director of the division of nanomedicine at the University of
California, Los Angeles. Still, he adds, it demonstrates that carbon nanotubes “do
have pathogenic potential.” What’s more, the idea that they might be inhaled
“needs to be entertained,” he says, and where these long carbon nanotubes are
used, “proper precautions” should be taken to ensure inhalation will be minimized.
The new data also show that all carbon nanotubes are not
alike in terms of toxicity. Some were soft, like cooked spaghetti, and the
body’s trash-collecting macrophage cells easily scarfed them up. Even short,
straight fibers were collected for
discarding by these cells. Not so with long multi-walled nanotubes, essentially
nested tubes that in cross section display the appearance of tree rings. These especially
stiff nanocylinders “frustrated” the macrophages attempts to cull them, says
study coauthor Andrew Maynard of the
Woodrow Wilson
International Center
for Scholars in Washington, D.C.
When a nanotube exceeds 15 micrometers in length, “the
macrophage can’t physically stretch itself to engulf the entire fiber,” he says,
so the nanotube “ends up penetrating through the edge of the macrophage,
killing it.” The macrophage’s demise triggers inflammation and the recruitment
of backups that ultimately suffer the same fate. “It’s the same process that
happens with asbestos fibers,” he notes.
The study offers strong confirmation for
the idea that size and shape are a, if not the,
primary factor determining a rigid fiber’s toxicity, Maynard says. The findings
also “really shift us from a position of assuming these materials are safe to
one where we must assume they’re harmful until we’ve developed information showing they’re not.”
Found in: Environment