A four-year panel study of 206 nanomaterial-handling workers and 108 unexposed controls in Taiwan (Wu et al., 2019) found no cardiopulmonary, inflammatory, oxidative-damage, neurobehavioral, or genotoxic effects at modern low-emission workplaces, with one exception: dose-related increases in the antioxidant enzymes superoxide dismutase (SOD) and glutathione peroxidase (GPx). The authors concluded that long-term health effects of more than five years of nanomaterial use 'still need research'. The subsequent literature is as follows: an international prospective cohort (NanoExplore) has been launched with a harmonized protocol and validated exposure measurement, but only cross-sectional baseline analyses exist; a 2024 cumulative-exposure analysis associates 10-year exposure with worse pulmonary function but awaits confirmation; independent Czech data show antioxidant (glutathione) elevation at ~14 years of exposure, leaving the adaptive-versus-pathologic question open; and a 2025 field-wide scoping review of 303 studies confirms that long-term and cohort designs remain the least-studied. The open core — whether chronic or cumulative adverse health effects emerge beyond five years of exposure, under validated quantitative exposure assessment, in adequately sized single-material cohorts, with independent replication of the antioxidant-enzyme findings — remains unresolved.

Background

Engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) are deliberately manufactured particulate materials with at least one dimension between roughly 1 and 100 nanometers (e.g., metal oxides such as nano-titanium dioxide and nano-silica, carbon nanotubes, and carbon black), now used at industrial scale in electronics, composites, coatings, and consumer products. Workers who produce and handle them are exposed mainly by inhalation. Toxicology in animals shows that nanoparticles can drive oxidative stress (an imbalance in which reactive oxygen species damage lipids, proteins, and DNA) and inflammation, yet, as the source study puts it, no human illness had been confirmed to be attributable to engineered nanoparticles, so the human evidence base is the field's central gap.

The relevant epidemiologic designs build on one another. Early human studies were cross-sectional (one measurement per person): Liou et al. (2012) surveyed Taiwanese nanomaterial workers and found lower antioxidant enzymes and some cardiovascular-marker elevations at higher exposure; two U.S. cross-sectional studies of carbon nanotube and nanofiber workers (Schubauer-Berigan et al. 2018; Beard et al. 2018) reported subtle sputum and blood biomarker changes. Because a single snapshot cannot distinguish cause from effect or capture slow disease development, Wu et al. (2019) ran the field's first multi-year panel study: 206 nanomaterial-handling workers and 108 unexposed controls from 14 Taiwanese nanotechnology plants, examined up to five times over four years. Exposure was not measured personally but classified by control banding, a semi-quantitative risk-level scheme that assigns workers to exposure categories from the material's hazard and the process's containment. Health outcomes spanned cardiopulmonary function, heart-rate variability, inflammation and oxidative-damage markers, antioxidant enzyme activity, and genotoxicity. The only positive finding was a dose-related increase in the antioxidant enzymes SOD and glutathione peroxidase (GPx), the body's defenses against reactive oxygen species — a change directionally opposite to the decreases their own earlier cross-sectional study had found, which is why the authors asked whether such changes are early pathologic responses or transient, non-pathologic adaptations.

The panel study's stated limitations define the open problem: its semi-quantitative control-banding exposure surrogate can misclassify exposure; the cohort was small and heterogeneous (mixed nanomaterials, so no single material could be isolated and concurrent exposures could not be modeled); the biomarkers used mostly capture short-term effects rather than chronic disease; higher-exposure operations (spray drying, dry powder handling, polishing, milling, grinding) were underrepresented, so dose thresholds could not be determined; healthy-worker selection (healthier people stay in exposed jobs, masking effects) and loss to follow-up could bias results toward the null. The panel study's antioxidant-enzyme findings were not independently replicated at the time. Standard measurement concepts used below: exhaled breath condensate (EBC) is non-invasively collected airway-lining fluid in which inflammatory and oxidative-stress markers can be quantified; 8-OHdG (8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine) and 8-isoPGF2α (8-iso-prostaglandin F2α) are standard biomarkers of oxidative DNA damage and lipid peroxidation, respectively; particle number concentration (PNC) and lung-deposited surface area (LDSA) are quantitative inhalation-exposure metrics from direct-reading instruments; single-particle inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (SP-ICP-MS) can detect and size metal-based nanoparticles in blood and urine; FEV1 (forced expiratory volume in one second), FVC (forced vital capacity), and FEF25–75% are standard spirometric indices of airway function. No occupational exposure limits (OELs) exist for most engineered nanomaterials, which is both a consequence of the missing human dose-response evidence and a reason the evidence is needed.

Problem Statement

Determine whether occupational exposure to engineered nanomaterials causes chronic or cumulative adverse health effects that emerge only beyond the four-year window and low-emission exposure levels covered by the Wu et al. (2019) panel study — that is, effects of more than five years of nanomaterial use or at later latency — and, within the same body of evidence, establish the exposure–response relationship and settle whether the antioxidant-enzyme (SOD, GPx) changes observed there are early biologic responses or transient, non-pathologic adaptations. The evidence needed for this single objective comprises the following jointly required components: (a) prospective longitudinal follow-up of nanomaterial-handling workers with repeated measurements beyond five years of exposure; (b) validated quantitative personal exposure assessment (personal-sampling methods, exposure metrics such as particle number concentration and lung-deposited surface area, and standardized measurement protocols) replacing semi-quantitative control banding; (c) cohorts large and homogeneous enough to isolate single-material effects and to model concurrent exposure to multiple nanomaterials; (d) chronic-effect biomarkers and clinically relevant endpoints capable of capturing long-latency or slowly progressive outcomes; (e) characterization of higher-exposure scenarios such as spray drying, dry powder handling, and poorly controlled operations, to determine dose thresholds for adverse effects; (f) explicit control of healthy-worker selection, loss to follow-up, and residual confounding; and (g) independent replication under harmonized protocols of the reported antioxidant-enzyme changes. The open question is whether that evidence base, obtained with validated exposure metrics, establishes chronic adverse effects with their exposure–response relationship (including whether the antioxidant changes are adaptive or pathologic), rules them out with dose bounds meaningful at realistic workplace exposure levels — including, where feasible, higher-exposure operations, or cannot decide whether chronic adverse effects occur.

References

  1. Wu W-T, Li L-A, Tsou T-C, Wang S-L, Lee H-L, Shih T-S, Liou S-H. Longitudinal follow-up of health effects among workers handling engineered nanomaterials: a panel study. Environmental Health 2019;18(1):107. DOI 10.1186/s12940-019-0542-y. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-019-0542-y
  2. Liou S-H, Tsou T-C, Wang S-L, Li L-A, Chiang H-C, Li W-F, Lin P-P, Lai C-H, Lee H-L, Lin M-H, Hsu J-H, Chen C-R, Shih T-S, Liao H-Y, Chung Y-T. Epidemiological study of health hazards among workers handling engineered nanomaterials. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 2012;14(8):878. DOI 10.1007/s11051-012-0878-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-012-0878-5
  3. Schubauer-Berigan MK, Dahm MM, Erdely A, Beard JD, Birch ME, Evans DE, Fernback JE, Mercer RR, Bertke SJ, Eye T, de Perio MA. Association of pulmonary, cardiovascular, and hematologic metrics with carbon nanotube and nanofiber exposure among U.S. workers: a cross-sectional study. Particle and Fibre Toxicology 2018;15(1):22. DOI 10.1186/s12989-018-0258-0. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12989-018-0258-0
  4. Beard JD, Erdely A, Dahm MM, de Perio MA, Birch ME, Evans DE, Fernback JE, Eye T, Kodali V, Mercer RR, Bertke SJ, Schubauer-Berigan MK. Carbon nanotube and nanofiber exposure and sputum and blood biomarkers of early effect among U.S. workers. Environment International 2018;116:214–228. DOI 10.1016/j.envint.2018.04.004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.04.004
  5. Guseva Canu I, Plys E, Velarde Crézé C, Fito C, Hopf NB, Progiou A, Riganti C, Sauvain JJ, Squillacioti G, Suarez G, Wild P, Bergamaschi E. A harmonized protocol for an international multicenter prospective study of nanotechnology workers: the NanoExplore cohort. Nanotoxicology 2023;17(1):1–19. DOI 10.1080/17435390.2023.2180220. https://doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2023.2180220
  6. Hemmendinger M, Squillacioti G, Charreau T, Garzaro G, Ghelli F, Bono R, Sauvain JJ, Suarez G, Hopf NB, Wild P, Progiou A, Fito C, Bergamaschi E, Guseva Canu I. Occupational exposure to nanomaterials and biomarkers in exhaled air and urine: Insights from the NanoExplore international cohort. Environment International 2023;179:108157. DOI 10.1016/j.envint.2023.108157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2023.108157
  7. Squillacioti G, Charreau T, Wild P, Bellisario V, Ghelli F, Bono R, Bergamaschi E, Garzaro G, Guseva Canu I. Worse pulmonary function in association with cumulative exposure to nanomaterials. Hints of a mediation effect via pulmonary inflammation. Particle and Fibre Toxicology 2024;21(1):28. DOI 10.1186/s12989-024-00589-3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12989-024-00589-3
  8. Blank-Porat D, Amster E. Effect biomarkers of nanoparticle-exposed workers: A scoping review. Toxicology and Industrial Health 2023;39(10):537–563. DOI 10.1177/07482337231185994. https://doi.org/10.1177/07482337231185994
  9. Omari Shekaftik S, Mehrparvar N, Peivandi Z, Banasaz ST, Rafieepour A, Moghadasi N, Ashtarinezhad A. Occupational Exposure to Nanomaterials: A Scoping Review. Journal of Cluster Science 2025;36(4):152. DOI 10.1007/s10876-025-02864-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10876-025-02864-5
  10. Wu W-T, Jung W-T, Lee H-L. Lipid peroxidation metabolites associated with biomarkers of inflammation and oxidation stress in workers handling carbon nanotubes and metal oxide nanoparticles. Nanotoxicology 2021;15(5):577–587. DOI 10.1080/17435390.2021.1879303. https://doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2021.1879303
  11. Klusackova P, Lischkova L, Kolesnikova V, Navratil T, Vlckova S, Fenclova Z, Schwarz J, Ondracek J, Ondrackova L, Kostejn M, Dvorackova S, Rossnerova A, Pohanka M, Bradna P, Zdimal V, Pelclova D. Elevated glutathione in researchers exposed to engineered nanoparticles due to potential adaptation to oxidative stress. Nanomedicine (London) 2024;19(3):185–198. DOI 10.2217/nnm-2023-0207. https://doi.org/10.2217/nnm-2023-0207
  12. Bocca B, Battistini B, Leso V, Fontana L, Caimi S, Fedele M, Iavicoli I. Occupational Exposure to Metal Engineered Nanoparticles: A Human Biomonitoring Pilot Study Involving Italian Nanomaterial Workers. Toxics 2023;11(2):120. DOI 10.3390/toxics11020120. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11020120
  13. Bocca B, Battistini B. Biomarkers of exposure and effect in human biomonitoring of metal-based nanomaterials: their use in primary prevention and health surveillance. Nanotoxicology 2024;18(1):1–35. DOI 10.1080/17435390.2023.2301692. https://doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2023.2301692
  14. Omari Shekaftik S, Nasirzadeh N. 8-Hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG) as a biomarker of oxidative DNA damage induced by occupational exposure to nanomaterials: a systematic review. Nanotoxicology 2021;15(6):850–864. DOI 10.1080/17435390.2021.1936254. https://doi.org/10.1080/17435390.2021.1936254
  15. Hemmendinger M, Wild P, Shoman Y, Graille M, Bergamaschi E, Hopf N, Guseva Canu I. Reference ranges of oxidative stress biomarkers selected for non-invasive biological surveillance of nanotechnology workers: Study protocol and meta-analysis results for 8-OHdG in exhaled breath condensate. Toxicology Letters 2020;327:41–47. DOI 10.1016/j.toxlet.2020.03.021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2020.03.021
  16. Nasirzadeh N, Biganeh J, Khalatbari E, Mohammadpour S, Omari Shekaftik S. Sputum and nasal lavage lung-specific biomarkers in occupational exposure to nanomaterials; a mixed methods systematic review with meta-synthesis and meta-analysis. Inhalation Toxicology 2025;37(5–6):241–255. DOI 10.1080/08958378.2025.2544713. https://doi.org/10.1080/08958378.2025.2544713