Timing, hosts and locations of (grouped) events of NanoImpactNet

More documents

Recommendations

Info

NanoSafetyCluster - Compendium 2012 including comparable translocation towards secondary organs compared to the application by inhalation – the gold standard of lung toxicology research. 2. In vivo studies to determine toxic effects after acute (24hrs) exposure for the full panel of ENPs have been conducted. The data have been analysed and doseresponse relationships have been established for a range of endpoints. The intratracheal instillation of ZnO NM-110 and NM-111 will be repeated for 2 reasons. 1. Due to technical difficulties during blood drawing after administration of NM-110, no blood analysis was possible while effects are seen in blood parameters with ZnO NM-111. 2. Due to advances with ZnO toxicity testing in other projects, there could be indication for early changes in lung tissue. In the current protocol the lung tissue was used for protein and RNA analysis and not prepared for histopathological analysis. 3. Administration of nanomaterial in ApoE mice has finished and analysis of all parameters is underway. The studies in a rapid ageing mouse model have also started. 4. Oxidative stress and inflammation studies in wildtype mice by visualizing Matrix MetalloProteinase (MMP) and Cathepsin have also commenced. WP6 – Risk Assessment: Models of exposure-dose-response & structure-activity model development. Risk Analysis: combining hazard and exposure The progress of WP6 in the first reporting period is according to the ENPRA workplan. Specifically, we have achieved the following: 1. The ENPRA database templates have been produced for data collection from WP3, 4 and 5. 2. The ground work for Exposure modelling, QSAR, PBPK and PD modelling is ongoing. When data will be available, in the first quarter of 2011, results will be generated. The most notable results so far for WP6 are: 1. on preparatory work for modelling, including uncertainty analysis using Monte Carlo simulation. This is done in collaboration with US partner 19. Period 1 work has concentrated on data generation, with much of the WP6 work so far being preparatory. In Period 2, significant and important results from the Risk Assessment will be available. In the second reporting period, the data available from other WP are now increasingly available. The notable progresses in WP6 are: 1. The collection of data from WP3, 4 and 5 and later also from the US partners into the ENPRA database for QSAR analysis. 2. Partner 1 and Partner 14 have met to discuss the transfer the data for analysis 3. Bio-kinetics data from WP5 have been used for PBPK modelling 4. In vitro and in vivo endpoints commensurate for comparison have been identified 5. Model of exposure of ENP are being constructed using data from Partner 19. WP7 – Dissemination Strategy to maximise impact The progress of WP7 in the first reporting period is according to the ENPRA workplan. Specifically, we have achieved the following: 1. The main contributors (P14, P5 and P1) of this work package met face-to-face during the kick-off meeting (where a general agreement on the initial 6 months work plan and working procedures was achieved) and several times virtually by teleconference to agree organise further steps. Also the annual management meeting and the expert panel meeting offered opportunities to meet. 2. The dissemination strategy was implemented as foreseen by: • holding the first annual workshop with participation of the main stakeholders (EU CAs, Industry, NGOs, COM Services, OECD, other FP6/7 projects) and disseminating its outcome • organising the three experts' panel meeting and producing and disseminating the two EONS reports • participating in a number of workshops/conferences both in the EU and the US • participating in one OECD experts' meeting The most notable results for WP7 so far are the regular and high-impact events to disseminate the idea and results of ENPRA. Overall, the work package is well on track and the foreseen milestones and deliverables have been reached without major problems. This seems to be the case as well for the next milestones and deliverables. 3.1.1. Expected final results and their potential impact and use (including the socio-economic impact and the wider societal implications of the project so far), ENPRA has reached the Mid-Term Milestones. As demonstrated above, the major achievement of ENPRA so far are the results from the in vitro (WP4) and in vivo tests (WP5) together with the measurement of the ENP physico-chemical characteristics for Hazard Identification. So far, there is remarkable concordance between in vitro and vivo results (with the exception of nano silver). The ENPRA team is currently analysing and formulating new hypotheses regarding the low toxicity of the ENP samples in contrast to the published results in the public domain. In the second reporting period we continue with the following: 1. The 2 st Annual ENPRA Workshop and Stakeholders Panel Meeting took place in Somma Lombardo (Italy) from 10 to 12 May 2011 organised by the JRC-IHCP. This time the workshop theme was "Challenges of Regulation and Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials" 20 Compendium of Projects in the European NanoSafety Cluster
and it was organised in the frame of the JRC Enlargement and Integration Action, that allowed to support the participation of scientists from EU and Associate Candidate Countries. Attendance of members of the Competent Authorities for REACH and Classification and Labelling Sub-Group on Nanomaterials (CASG Nano) and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) was supported. Also other strategic stakeholders as OECD, NGO's (representing environment and workers' protection organisations), the contractors for the RIP-oNs projects and chemicals and nanomaterials industry and EFSA were involved. Some related projects under FP7 Research Program participated too. It involved about 80 participants. Generalist and specialised press were also present. During the workshop, 34 experts from 26 different organisations informed the participants on the latest scientific progress in the field of nanoparticles risk assessment produced within the ENPRA and other related projects and presented and discussed recent developments concerning legislation in the EU and beyond. A full report of the event is currently in the final steps for publication and distribution. Information can be found in the JRC site http://ihcp.jrc.ec.europa.eu/events_workshops/jointjrc-nano-enpra-2011. The results of the 2 nd workshop will be published online on the JRC site (presentations already on-line, full report by mid November) and widely distributed among targeted stakeholder. 2. The 4 th EONS report (state of the art report summarising the discussion of the 4 th ENPRA expert panel meeting held in Brussels on March 31 st ) was Advisory Panel US Research Programmes US Regulatory Processes P1, P2-P15 WP1 Management coordination and management P13, P12 P2-P12,P14 P15, P12,P9 WP3 ENP Characterisation WP4 in vitro testing WP5 in vivo validation WP6 Modelling P1,P13,P14 P17 P16, P19,P20 P16, P19,P20 P18, P19, P20 WP2 EU-US collaboration infrastructure for collaboration NanoSafetyCluster - Compendium 2012 published on June 2011 (D7.2 – M24) The report (10 experts’ article commentaries) was then disseminated. The 5 th ENPRA expert panel meeting will be held in Paris on October 13, 2011. The event will gather 13 participants including ENPRA partners (P1, P5, P6, P8, and P14) and French OMNT experts (5). In the next period, ENPRA will 1. Analyse the body of experimental data generated by the WP4 and 5 as well as data contributed by the US partners in order to Identify the reason(s) behind the relative low toxicity of the ENP tested. Specifically, the mechanisms of toxicity of ENP selected in ENPRA; 2. relate these facts to the physico-chemical characteristics of ENP in WP3 by means of modelling. 3. Assess the potential health risks with regards to the tested ENP With our regular dissemination events, we will be able to keep the stakeholder community informed. The impacts on industry strategy for the production of ENP as well as the assurance for nanotechnology workers and consumers on the relative safety of these ENP is expected to be significant. A further impact on the use of ENP in general for nanomedicine is also to be expected. In summary, the second term of ENPRA will bring together many significant results and advance the state of the art knowledge on nanotoxicology further. P14,P5,P1 WP7 Risk Calculation & Dissemination P16,P17,P18,P19,P20,P21 Stakeholder Panel EC, OECD, NGO SME Fig 3. Flow chart describing the information flow between different WP of ENPRA (solid lines) and the process of coordination, management and collaboration (dotted lines) Compendium of Projects in the European NanoSafety Cluster 21
Page 1: Compendium of Projects in the Europ
Page 5 and 6: EDITED BY Michael Riediker, PD Dr.s
Page 7 and 8: CONTENTS NanoSafetyCluster - Compen
Page 9 and 10: Project Acronym ENNSATOX ENPRA EURO
Page 11 and 12: Foreword NanoSafetyCluster - Compen
Page 13 and 14: ENNSATOX ENgineered Nanoparticle Im
Page 15 and 16: The biological membrane and its dep
Page 17 and 18: distinguishes between the interacti
Page 19 and 20: Figure 10. Schematic representation
Page 21 and 22: WP5: • Permeability of NPs in hyd
Page 23 and 24: NanoSafetyCluster - Compendium 2012
Page 25 and 26: ENPRA RISK ASSESSMENT OF ENGINEERED
Page 27 and 28: vitro findings with in vivo models;
Page 29: protocols with real biological samp
Page 33 and 34: First Name Last Name Affiliation Ad
Page 37 and 38: EURO-NanoTox European Center for Na
Page 39 and 40: silver nanoparticles, iron nanopart
Page 41 and 42: The core functions of the Center, h
Page 43 and 44: 8 Directory Table 1 Directory of pe
Page 45 and 46: HINAMOX Health Impact of Engineered
Page 47 and 48: High Resolution Electron Microscopy
Page 49 and 50: integrated risk assessment. Integra
Page 51 and 52: powders: What is the difference in
Page 57 and 58: InLiveTox Intestinal, Liver and End
Page 59 and 60: - to develop and validate a novel m
Page 61 and 62: environments, IEEE Industrial Elect
Page 63 and 64: INSTANT Innovative Sensor for the f
Page 65 and 66: complementary research which will l
Page 67 and 68: 7 Copyright NanoSafetyCluster - Com
Page 69 and 70: ITS-NANO Intelligent testing strate
Page 71 and 72: approach to conveying the appropria
Page 73 and 74: in the discussion. The integration
Page 75 and 76: MARINA MANAGING RISKS of NANOMATERI
Page 77 and 78: for risk analysis, these tools need
Page 79 and 80: environmental ENM toxicity, but tox
Page 81 and 82:
propose it as a Method Validation F
Page 83 and 84:
and SiO2-NM200 and NM203, and a SiO
Page 85 and 86:
ModNanoTox Modelling nanoparticle t
Page 87 and 88:
3) To model environmental exposure
Page 89 and 90:
Nanodetector European Network on th
Page 91 and 92:
measurement interval. Measurements
Page 93 and 94:
5 Directory Table 1 Directory of pe
Page 95 and 96:
NANODEVICE Novel Concepts, Methods,
Page 97 and 98:
ENP in order to be sure of their sa
Page 99 and 100:
4.3 Exploring the association betwe
Page 101 and 102:
NanoSafetyCluster - Compendium 2012
Page 103 and 104:
NanoFATE Nanoparticle Fate Assessme
Page 105 and 106:
or proteins associated with particu
Page 107 and 108:
sludge. Information on rates of slu
Page 109 and 110:
The exposures to be conducted will
Page 111:
NanoFATE progression beyond the “
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
NanoSafetyCluster ‐ Compendium 20
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288:
show all

Timing, hosts and locations of (grouped) events of NanoImpactNet

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?