Open access peer-reviewed chapter

Biocompatibility of Doped Semiconductors Nanocrystals and Nanocomposites

Written By

Anielle Christine Almeida Silva, Mariana Alves Pereira Zóia, Lucas Ian Veloso Correia, Fernanda Van Petten Vasconcelos Azevedo, Aline Teodoro de Paula, Larissa Prado Maia, Layara Santana de Carvalho, Loyna Nobile Carvalho, Maria Paula Camargo Costa, Layssa Carrilho Giaretta, Renata Santos Rodrigues, Veridiana de Melo Ávila, Luiz Ricardo Goulart and Noelio Oliveira Dantas

Submitted: 13 October 2017 Reviewed: 11 April 2018 Published: 25 July 2018

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.77197

From the Edited Volume

Cytotoxicity

Edited by Tülay Aşkin Çelik

Chapter metrics overview

1,281 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics

Abstract

Exposure of humans and environment to nanocrystals are inevitable, and nanotoxicological analyses are a requirement. The wide variety of nanocrystals with different applications is increasing, and characterization of their effects after exposure includes their potential toxicity and uses. This review summarizes the characterization of doped nanocrystals and nanocomposites, Ca-doped ZnO, Ag- and Eu-doped ZnO and Ni-doped ZnO NCs, their biocompatibility and applications. This review uncovers how these nanocrystals present desirable biocompatible properties, which can be useful as antitumoral and antimicrobial inducing agents, which differ markedly from toxic properties observed in other general nanocrystals.

Keywords

  • nanocrystals
  • nanocomposites
  • biocompatibility
  • doping
  • composites

1. Introduction

Cancer is one of the most common and serious diseases currently, considered a public health problem [1, 2, 3]. The prostate cancer, according to INCA, is the most accessible in men in Brazil and difficult diagnoses for slow development and absence of signaling in the early stages of the disease, and can progress to more advanced stages with metastasis. The success in treatment depend on the extent of cancer at the time of diagnosis and, thus, nanotechnology can be a tool to improve diagnostic technique and for improve the quality of treatments [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].

Breast cancer is considered as a heterogeneous disease in its pathological characteristics. The follow-up of the disease is quite complex, mainly due to the existence of the various tumor subtypes, which have different expression profile, therapeutic response and clinical behavior [4, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15]. The molecular classification divides breast cancers into many groups, based on molecular expression profile. Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), characterized by lack of expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2), comprises the highest invasive potential and worst clinical outcome [16, 17]. In addition, this breast cancer presents survival rates significantly lower and recurrence rates significantly higher compared to other breast cancer subtypes [17, 18, 19]. Moreover, the identification of specific targeted therapy and improved diagnosis for TNBC is fundamental.

In the last decades, cancer has been presenting itself as a health problem public interest, raising the urgent interest in research for the development of drugs with antitumor activity. Nanotechnology has been a tool for development of new nanoparticles with antineoplastic properties [5, 20, 21, 22, 23].

In recent years, with the emergence of certain biomedical problems, such as increased infections of pathogenic strains resistant to antimicrobials and the development of new cancers, the development of new effective tools has been extremely important. Therefore, the use of nanotechnology is important, since depending on the size and shape of nanocrystals it is possible to control their physical and chemical properties [24, 25].

The concern about pathogens and multi-drug microorganisms in food, veterinary and medical industry are boosting the demand for new antimicrobial substances. Since a large number of microorganisms have showed resistance against different antibiotics, the potential antimicrobial substance should be able to destroy or inhibit these microorganisms in different matrices and do not promote resistance [26, 27, 28, 29]. Moreover, this compound should be cheap, easy to use, bacteria specific and non-toxicity to the human or animals.

Pathogenic microbial contamination and eradication of organic pollutants have been a major threat to mankind and the environment. Therefore, the development of new, more efficient materials with improved photocatalytic and antimicrobial activity is of great importance.

The increase in bacterial resistance towards conventional antibiotics generally occurs because some bacteria form slime which facilitates adhesion and formation of biofilms on any surface or implantable devices [30, 31]. Thus, the formation of biofilms increases bacterial resistance, preventing the action of antibiotics [32, 33, 34, 35, 36]. In order to reduce microbial adhesion, several researchers have been studying nanocrystals with antimicrobial properties as a promising tool to control microbial adhesion, since nanocrystals with catalytic properties have the potential to reduce biofilm formation [32, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40].

Therefore, in the book chapter we investigated the cytotoxicity of Ag or Ca doped ZnO NCs in normal and tumor cells, as well as, the viability of ZnO doped with Ag, Eu, Ni and your nanocomposites against microorganisms.

Advertisement

2. Doped semiconductors nanocrystals and nanocomposites

The development of nanoparticles for medical purposes has been widely investigated, since when the size is greatly reduced at the nanometric scale, the reason surface/volume increase generating new and interesting properties, such as a greater ability to absorb drugs, probes and proteins [41] In addition to size and shape, a crystalline nanoparticle (NPs) alters as both physical and biological properties. For example, Spanó et al. have shown that amorphous nanoparticles are more genotoxic than crystalline (nanocrystals) [42]. In addition, a crystal phase in which nanocrystals (NCs) themselves also enables physical and biological properties [43].

The use of nanoparticles and nanocrystals as novel therapeutic antimicrobial agents have been described some of the metallic compounds possess antimicrobial property especially inorganic metal oxides [44]. Moreover, the alliance of nanotechnology and biology has brought to fore metals in the form of nanoparticles as potential antimicrobial agents.

Several types of nanocrystals have been synthesized in order to obtain an efficient nanomaterial. However, it is important to emphasize that nanocrystals must be biocompatible and specific [45]. Based on this and knowing that zinc oxide nanocrystals (ZnO) are biocompatible materials, according to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in this chapter we investigated this nanocrystal.

Nanocrystals of zinc oxide (ZnO) exhibit many important characteristics, such as high catalytic activity, chemical and physical stability, as well as ultraviolet (UV) absorption [46, 47]. The technique most used to produce defects aiming to increase the catalytic activity in ZnO nanocrystals is based on the choice of synthesis methods [34], use of nanocomposite photocatalysts [48], and doping with impurities [49].

ZnO nanocrystals have the unique ability to induce oxidative stress in cancer cells and bacteria, being one of the main mechanisms of cytotoxicity and bactericidal action [32, 50, 51]. This property is due to the semiconductor nature of ZnO, which induces the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), leading to oxidative stress and cell death or bacteria [52, 53, 54]. Another type of nanocrystalline that enters the category of biocompatible is nickel because it is a basic element that is part of metalloproteins, being vital for living beings. Nickel (Ni), silver (Ag) and calcium (Ca) nanocrystals and oxide have several advantages as antimicrobial and antitumor agents [55, 56, 57].

Figure 1 shows the three-dimensional structures of the zinc, calcium, silver and nickel oxides, subsequently exemplifying the doping process and nanocomposites. The doping process consists of the substitution of ions in the crystalline structure of the nanocrystal. For example, in silver-doped ZnO nanocrystals, silver ions substitute the ions of Zn in the crystalline structure of ZnO.

Figure 1.

Three-dimensional structures of the zinc oxide, calcium oxide, silver oxide and nickel oxide, subsequently exemplifying the doping process and nanocomposites.

The formation of nanocomposites is the mixing of two types of nanocrystals in order to potentiate a certain physical property, or the presence of two interesting physical properties. Chu et al. demonstrated that the mixture of titanium dioxide nanocrystals with silver oxide enhanced the photocatalytic performance [58]. Thus, as the photocatalytic performance of nanocrystals is directly related to antineoplastic effect and bactericidal action the study of the mixture of nanocrystals (nanocomposites) is extremely important.

2.1. Cytotoxicity of doped nanocrystals and nanocomposites in cells

Normal epithelial cell line (RWPE-1), prostate cancer cells (PC3) and human breast adenocarcinoma (MDA-MB-231), were cultured in RMPI medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) and 0.1% gentamycin. For the RWPE-1 strain, the medium was further enriched with epidermal growth factor (10 ng/mL) and bovine pituitary extract. Cells were maintained at 37°C, 5% CO2. The cells were grown in 25 cm2 bottles and transferred before reaching the confluence level (80%). Cell viability was determined by the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay. Cells (1 × 105/well) were seeded in 96-well plates and incubated overnight for adherence. The culture medium was removed and replaced with medium containing the nanocrystals in different concentrations diluted in PBS and evaluated at 24 hours. After the indicated period, MTT (5 mg/mL) was added and the plates were incubated for 4 hours. Then, 50 μL of sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) (20%) was added in each well to dissolve the formazan crystal. The absorbance was measured at 570 nm. Next, the cell viability calculation was performed.

Figure 2 show the viability of nanocrystals in function of concentration for the (a) normal epithelial cell line (RWPE-1) and (b) prostate cancer cells (PC3) at 24 hours. In the RWPE-1 cells the ZnO NCs and Ag doped ZnO was not observed cytotoxic effect. However, in the composite formed by Ag doped ZnO and 68% of AgO NCs occurs the reduction in cell viability. For PC3 cells the ZnO and Ag doped ZnO NCs had no cytotoxic effect at all concentrations, but the composite had a significant inhibitory effect on cell viability, however, there was an increase in cell viability for PC3 cells at concentrations of 10 and 25 μg/mL in 24 hours time.

Figure 2.

Viability of (a) RWPE and (b) PC3 after treatment with ZnO, Ag doped ZnO and nanocomposite (Ag doped ZnO and 68% of AgO NCs) with different concentration after 24 hours.

Figure 3 show the viability of Ca doped ZnO, ZnO and CaO nanocrystals in function of concentration for the human breast adenocarcinoma (MDA-MB-231) cells at 24 hours. The cytotoxic potential of CaO nanocrystals was extremely lower against cells and ZnO was performed significantly damage in cells. Interestingly, the Ca doped ZnO NCs displayed high cytotoxicity against the cells. The Ca doped ZnO NCs reduced the viability in a not dose-dependent manner, damaging about 40–93% of cells at concentrations of 12.5–100 μg/mL.

Figure 3.

Viability after treatment with ZnO, Ca doped ZnO and CaO nanocrystals in function of concentration for the MDA-MB-231 cells at 24 hours.

2.2. Cytotoxicity of doped nanocrystals and nanocomposites in bacteria

The ZnO doped with silver and europium has been tested in preliminary study against Gram-negative Escherichia coli and Gram-positive Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus faecalis using different methods. The agar well diffusion test was made according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute and the resazurin microtiter assay plate testing was also performed.

The inhibition zone produced by ZnO doped with silver increase in Ag dopant concentration. The antimicrobial action proposed for nanocrystal against microorganisms can be related with: (a) the adherence of the nanomaterials on the surface of the bacteria, which can lead to physical blockage of transport channels of the cells; (b) the oxidation of membranes lipids by reactive oxygen species (ROS) like H2O2, singlet oxygen and hydroxyl radicals [44].

The viability assay against S. aureus and E. coli showed that the Ag and europium (Eu) doped ZnO NCs inhibited these microorganisms. However, the increase of Eu doping and Eu2O3 NCs promoted the growth of the microorganisms (Figure 4). Concentrations greater than 1% Eu occurs the formation of a nanocomposite that constitutes of Eu and Ag doped ZnO and EuO. The use of nanocrystals as antimicrobial substance should be promisor in different areas. These NCs could be a potential antimicrobial, which can be apply in food, veterinary and medical industry. However, complementary studies should be done to better understand the effects of this compound on biological molecules.

Figure 4.

Viability assay against S. aureus and E. coli of Ag and Eu doped ZnO, and ZnO and EuO NCs.

The potential antimicrobial activity of nanocrystals against potential pathogens have been studied. On the other hand, large number of microorganisms have showed resistance against antibiotics [59, 60]. Zinc (Zn) and nickel (Ni) are transition metals that generate free electrons, so when these ions are incorporated into nanocrystals may amplify the bactericidal effect [61, 62, 63, 64].

The viability assay against Proteus vulgaris and Klebsiella pneumonia with different concentration of the nanocomposite hybrid (Ni doped ZnO + NiO NCs), ZnO and NiO NCs (Figure 5). Observed that NiO NCs showed antimicrobial activity against all microorganisms tested. P. vulgaris was the most sensitive in presence of NiO NCs, whereas K. pneumonia was more resistant. The antimicrobial effect may be due to production of electron–hole pairs. After a cascade of reactions, hydrogen peroxide is produced and penetrate into the cell, destroy the membrane, denatures proteins and damages DNA causing cell death [31, 38, 51]. Therefore, due to its simple preparation, low cost and antibacterial activity, these NCs have potential to be used as antibacterial agents against a wide range of microorganisms.

Figure 5.

Viability assay against Proteus vulgaris and Klebsiella pneumonia with different concentration of the nanocomposite hybrid with ZnO, Ni doped ZnO + NiO and NiO NCs.

Advertisement

3. Conclusion

The cytotoxicity analysis of Ag or Ca doped ZnO NCs in normal, tumor prostate and breast cells was possible to identify the antitumor effect potentialization when these ions (Ag and Ca) were incorporated into ZnO NCs. In this way, these doped NCs can become a target in the treatment of cancer. The viability assay against microorganisms showed that the increase of Eu doping in ZnO NCs promoted the growth of the microorganisms and Ni doped ZnO with NiO NCs are more efficient than NiO NCs to K. pneumonia.

Advertisement

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support from the following agencies: CAPES, FAPEMIG, MCT/CNPq.

Advertisement

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Murray T, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA: a Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2008;58(2):71-96
  2. 2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2017. CA: a Cancer Journal for Clinicians. 2017;67(1):7-30
  3. 3. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2017. 2017;21(20):2525-2538
  4. 4. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M, Parkin DM, Forman D, Bray F. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: Sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. International Journal of Cancer. 2015;136(5):E359-E386
  5. 5. Sanna V, Sechi M. Nanoparticle therapeutics for prostate cancer treatment. Maturitas. 2012:27-32
  6. 6. Villanueva T. Prostate cancer: Prostate quartet. Nature Reviews. Cancer. 2011;11(3):159
  7. 7. Bashir MN. Epidemiology of prostate cancer. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. 2015;16(13):5137-5141
  8. 8. Stewart RW, Lizama S, Peairs K, Sateia HF, Choi Y. Screening for prostate cancer. Seminars in Oncology. 2017;44(1):47-56
  9. 9. Emberton M. Is a negative prostate biopsy a risk factor for a prostate cancer related death? The Lancet Oncology. 2017;18(2):162-163
  10. 10. Litwin MS, Tan H-J. The diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer. JAMA. 2017;317(24):2532
  11. 11. Tao Z, Shi A, Lu C, Song T, Zhang Z, Zhao J. Breast cancer: Epidemiology and etiology. Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics. 2015;72(2):333-338
  12. 12. Tomao F, Papa A, Zaccarelli E, Rossi L, Caruso D, Minozzi M, Vici P, Frati L, Tomao S. Triple-negative breast cancer: New perspectives for targeted therapies. OncoTargets and Therapy. 2015;8:177-193
  13. 13. Schneider KA. All About Breast Cancer. Couns. About Cancer; 2011. pp. 151-185
  14. 14. Scully OJ, Bay B-H, Yip G, Yu Y. Breast cancer metastasis. Cancer Genomics Proteomics. 2012;9(5):311-320
  15. 15. BCSC. Types of breast cancer. In: Breast Cancer Soc. Canada. 2014. p. 1
  16. 16. Foulkes WD, Smith IE, Reis-Filho JS. Triple-negative breast cancer. The New England Journal of Medicine. 2010;363(20):1938-1948
  17. 17. Harbeck N, Gnant M. Breast cancer. Lancet. 2017;389(10074):1134-1150
  18. 18. Bondarenko O, Juganson K, Ivask A, Kasemets K, Mortimer M, Kahru A. Toxicity of Ag, CuO and ZnO nanoparticles to selected environmentally relevant test organisms and mammalian cells in vitro: A critical review. Archives of Toxicology. 2013;87(7):1181-1200
  19. 19. Akram M, Iqbal M, Daniyal M, Khan AU. Awareness and current knowledge of breast cancer. Biological Research. 2017;50(1):33
  20. 20. Hu F, Ran Y, Zhou Z, Gao M. Preparation of bioconjugates of CdTe nanocrystals for cancer marker detection. Nanotechnology. 2006;17(12):2972-2977
  21. 21. Li YY, Tian YH, Nie GJ. Antineoplastic activities of Gd@C82(OH)22 nanoparticles: Tumor microenvironment regulation. Science China. Life Sciences. 2012;55(10):884-890
  22. 22. Jia F, Liu X, Li L, Mallapragada S, Narasimhan B, Wang Q. Multifunctional nanoparticles for targeted delivery of immune activating and cancer therapeutic agents. Journal of Controlled Release. 2013;172(3):1020-1034
  23. 23. Liechty WB, Peppas NA. Expert opinion: Responsive polymer nanoparticles in cancer therapy. European Journal of Pharmaceutics and Biopharmaceutics. 2012;80(2):241-246
  24. 24. Kolodziejczak-Radzimska A, Jesionowski T. Zinc oxide-from synthesis to application: A review. Materials (Basel). 2014;7(4):2833-2881
  25. 25. Wang ZL. Zinc oxide nanostructures: Growth, properties and applications. Journal of Physics. Condensed Matter. 2004;16(25):R829-R858
  26. 26. Appendini P, Hotchkiss JH. Review of antimicrobial food packaging. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies. 2002;3(2):113-126
  27. 27. O’Niel J. Review on antimicrobial resistance. In: Antimicrob. Rsesistance Tackling a Cris. Heal. Wealth Nations. 2014 (December)
  28. 28. Verraes C, Van Boxstael S, Van Meervenne E, Van Coillie E, Butaye P, Catry B, de Schaetzen MA, Van Huffel X, Imberechts H, Dierick K, Daube G, Saegerman C, De Block J, Dewulf J, Herman L. Antimicrobial resistance in the food chain: A review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2013;10(7):2643-2669
  29. 29. Balouiri M, Sadiki M, Ibnsouda SK. Methods for in vitro evaluating antimicrobial activity: A review. Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis. 2016;6(2):71-79
  30. 30. Mah TFC, O’Toole GA. Mechanisms of biofilm resistance to antimicrobial agents. Trends in Microbiology. 2001;9(1):34-39
  31. 31. Singh S, Singh SK, Chowdhury I, Singh R. Understanding the mechanism of bacterial biofilms resistance to antimicrobial agents. The Open Microbiology Journal. 2017;11(1):53-62
  32. 32. Pati R, Mehta RK, Mohanty S, Padhi A, Sengupta M, Vaseeharan B, Goswami C, Sonawane A. Topical application of zinc oxide nanoparticles reduces bacterial skin infection in mice and exhibits antibacterial activity by inducing oxidative stress response and cell membrane disintegration in macrophages. Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology, and Medicine. 2014;10(6):1195-1208
  33. 33. Dizaj SM, Lotfipour F, Barzegar-Jalali M, Zarrintan MH, Adibkia K. Antimicrobial activity of the metals and metal oxide nanoparticles. Materials Science and Engineering: C. 2014;44:278-284
  34. 34. Espitia PJP, de Soares NFF, Coimbra JS d R, de Andrade NJ, Cruz RS, Medeiros EAA. Zinc oxide nanoparticles: Synthesis, antimicrobial activity and food packaging applications. Food and Bioprocess Technology. 2012;5(5):1447-1464
  35. 35. Ma Z, Garrido-Maestu A, Jeong KC. Application, mode of action, and in vivo activity of chitosan and its micro- and nanoparticles as antimicrobial agents: A review. Carbohydrate Polymers. 2017;176:257-265
  36. 36. Lakshmaiah Narayana J, Chen JY. Antimicrobial peptides: Possible anti-infective agents. Peptides. 2015;72:88-94
  37. 37. Liu J-J, Chang Q, Bao M-M, Yuan B, Yang K, Ma Y-Q. Silicon quantum dots delivered phthalocyanine for fluorescence guided photodynamic therapy of tumor. Chinese Physics B. 2017;26(9):98102
  38. 38. Arakha M, Pal S, Samantarrai D, Panigrahi TK, Mallick BC, Pramanik K, Mallick B, Jha S. Antimicrobial activity of iron oxide nanoparticle upon modulation of nanoparticle-bacteria interface. Scientific Reports. 2015;5:14813
  39. 39. Durán N, Nakazato G, Seabra AB. Antimicrobial activity of biogenic silver nanoparticles, and silver chloride nanoparticles: An overview and comments. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2016;100(15):6555-6570
  40. 40. Jian HJ, Wu RS, Lin TY, Li YJ, Lin HJ, Harroun SG, Lai JY, Huang CC. Super-cationic carbon quantum dots synthesized from Spermidine as an eye drop formulation for topical treatment of bacterial keratitis. ACS Nano. 2017;11(7):6703-6716
  41. 41. Silva ACA, Dantas NO, Silva MJB, Spanó MA, Goulart LR. Functional nanocrystals: Towards biocompatibility, nontoxicity and biospecificity. In: Advances in Biochemistry & Applications in Medicine. 1st ed. Wilmington: Open Access eBooks; 2017. pp. 1-27
  42. 42. Reis É d M, Rezende AAA d, Santos DV, Oliveria PF d, Nicolella HD, Tavares DC, Silva ACA, Dantas NO, Spanó MA. Assessment of the genotoxic potential of two zinc oxide sources (amorphous and nanoparticles) using the in vitro micronucleus test and the in vivo wing somatic mutation and recombination test. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 2015;84:55-63
  43. 43. Reis É d M, de Rezende AAA, de Oliveira PF, Nicolella HD, Tavares DC, Silva ACA, Dantas NO, Spanó MA. Evaluation of titanium dioxide nanocrystal-induced genotoxicity by the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay and the drosophila wing spot test. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 2016;96:309-319
  44. 44. Sawai J. Quantitative evaluation of antibacterial activities of metallic oxide powders (ZnO, MgO and CaO) by conductimetric assay. Journal of Microbiological Methods. 2003;54(2):177-182
  45. 45. Sousa CJA, Pereira MC, Almeida RJ, Loyola AM, Silva ACA, Dantas NO. Synthesis and characterization of zinc oxide nanocrystals and histologic evaluation of their biocompatibility by means of intraosseous implants. International Endodontic Journal. 2014;47(5):416-424
  46. 46. Tankhiwale R, Bajpai SK. Preparation, characterization and antibacterial applications of ZnO-nanoparticles coated polyethylene films for food packaging. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces. 2012;90(1):16-20
  47. 47. Warheit DB. How meaningful are the results of nanotoxicity studies in the absence of adequate material characterization? Toxicological Sciences. 2008;101(2):183-185
  48. 48. Pawinrat P, Mekasuwandumrong O, Panpranot J. Synthesis of Au-ZnO and Pt-ZnO nanocomposites by one-step flame spray pyrolysis and its application for photocatalytic degradation of dyes. Catalysis Communications. 2009;10(10):1380-1385
  49. 49. Li Y, Zhao X, Fan W. Structural, electronic, and optical properties of Ag-doped ZnO nanowires: First principles study. Journal of Physical Chemistry C. 2011;115(9):3552-3557
  50. 50. Dryden M. Reactive oxygen therapy: A novel antimicrobial. International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents. 2017;51(3):299-303
  51. 51. Premanathan M, Karthikeyan K, Jeyasubramanian K, Manivannan G. Selective toxicity of ZnO nanoparticles toward gram-positive bacteria and cancer cells by apoptosis through lipid peroxidation. Nanomedicine Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine. 2011;7(2):184-192
  52. 52. Salnikow K, Su W, Blagosklonny MV, Costa M. Carcinogenic metals induce hypoxia-inducible factor-stimulated transcription by reactive oxygen species-independent mechanism. Cancer Research. 2000;60(13):3375-3378
  53. 53. Sawai J, Yoshikawa T. Quantitative evaluation of antifungal activity of metallic oxide powders (MgO, CaO and ZnO) by an indirect conductimetric assay. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 2004;96(4):803-809
  54. 54. Javed Akhtar M, Ahamed M, Kumar S, Majeed Khan M, Ahmad J, Alrokayan SA. Zinc oxide nanoparticles selectively induce apoptosis in human cancer cells through reactive oxygen species. International Journal of Nanomedicine. 2012;7:845-857
  55. 55. Ahamed M, Ali D, Alhadlaq HA, Akhtar MJ. Nickel oxide nanoparticles exert cytotoxicity via oxidative stress and induce apoptotic response in human liver cells (HepG2). Chemosphere. 2013;93(10):2514-2522
  56. 56. Roy A, Gauri SS, Bhattacharya M, Bhattacharya J. Antimicrobial activity of CaO nanoparticles. Journal of Biomedical Nanotechnology. 2013;9(9):1570-1578
  57. 57. Kim JS, Kuk E, Yu KN, Kim JH, Park SJ, Lee HJ, Kim SH, Park YK, Park YH, Hwang CY, Kim YK, Lee YS, Jeong DH, Cho MH. Antimicrobial effects of silver nanoparticles. Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine. 2007;3(1):95-101
  58. 58. Chu H, Liu X, Liu J, Li J, Wu T, Li H, Lei W, Xu Y, Pan L. Synergetic effect of Ag2O as co-catalyst for enhanced photocatalytic degradation of phenol on N-TiO2. Materials Science and Engineering: B Solid-State Materials Advanced Technology. 2016;211:128-134
  59. 59. Padmavathy N, Vijayaraghavan R. Enhanced bioactivity of ZnO nanoparticles—An antimicrobial study. Science and Technology of Advanced Materials. 2008;9(3):35004
  60. 60. Pasquet J, Chevalier Y, Pelletier J, Couval E, Bouvier D, Bolzinger MA. The contribution of zinc ions to the antimicrobial activity of zinc oxide. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects. 2014;457(1):263-274
  61. 61. Minzanova ST, Mironov VF, Mironova LG, Nizameev IR, Kholin KV, Voloshina AD, Kulik NV, Nazarov NG, Milyukov VA. Synthesis, properties, and antimicrobial activity of pectin complexes with cobalt and nickel. Chemistry of Natural Compounds. 2016;52(1):26-31
  62. 62. Denkhaus E, Salnikow K. Nickel essentiality, toxicity, and carcinogenicity. Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology. 2002;42(1):35-56
  63. 63. Mandal BK. Nanobiomaterials in Antimicrobial Therapy. Elsevier; 2016
  64. 64. Saito M. Antibacterial, deodorizing, and UV absorbing materials obtained with zinc oxide (ZnO) coated fabrics. Journal of Industrial Textiles. 1993;23(2):150-164

Written By

Anielle Christine Almeida Silva, Mariana Alves Pereira Zóia, Lucas Ian Veloso Correia, Fernanda Van Petten Vasconcelos Azevedo, Aline Teodoro de Paula, Larissa Prado Maia, Layara Santana de Carvalho, Loyna Nobile Carvalho, Maria Paula Camargo Costa, Layssa Carrilho Giaretta, Renata Santos Rodrigues, Veridiana de Melo Ávila, Luiz Ricardo Goulart and Noelio Oliveira Dantas

Submitted: 13 October 2017 Reviewed: 11 April 2018 Published: 25 July 2018