An early step of evaluating a nanomaterial’s potential for biological applications is investigating its interactions with cells and biological fluids. These experiments generate complex data, which are summarized and analyzed through the use of metrics. Choosing appropriate metrics is thus critical to build a foundation for nanomaterial research. Unfortunately, several widely used metrics in the bio-nano scientific literature have significant issues and may not be delivering their intended insight. This perspective will label and discuss three problematic metrics in wide use within the field: Percentage Cell Association, used to measure the interaction strength between a cell and a nanoengineered material; Internalization Factor, used to measure the ability of a cell to internalize a nanoengineered system; and Detected Protein Abundance, used to analyze the composition of proteins that adsorb to a nanoengineered surface. We review the origin of each metric and explain why each fails to deliver the intended insight in the domain of bio-nano experiments. Finally, for each metric, we present alternative metrics that deliver the necessary insight while imposing little (or no) additional experimental burden. We hope that this perspective will increase the use of better metrics, improve reporting, and ultimately aid the transition of bio-nano science to a more quantitative field.

中文翻译：

---

生物纳米科学：更好的指标将加速进步

评估纳米材料生物应用潜力的早期步骤是研究其与细胞和生物体液的相互作用。这些实验会生成复杂的数据，这些数据通过使用指标进行汇总和分析。因此，选择合适的指标对于为纳米材料研究奠定基础至关重要。不幸的是，生物纳米科学文献中一些广泛使用的指标存在重大问题，可能无法提供预期的洞察力。该观点将标记并讨论该领域广泛使用的三个有问题的指标： 细胞关联百分比，用于测量细胞与纳米工程材料之间的相互作用强度；内化因子，用于衡量细胞内化纳米工程系统的能力；和检测到的蛋白质丰度，用于分析吸附到纳米工程表面的蛋白质的组成。我们回顾了每个指标的起源，并解释了为什么每个指标都未能在生物纳米实验领域提供预期的洞察力。最后，对于每个指标，我们提出了替代指标，这些指标提供必要的洞察力，同时施加很少（或没有）额外的实验负担。我们希望这种观点将更多地使用更好的指标，改进报告，并最终帮助生物纳米科学向更定量的领域过渡。我们提出了替代指标，可以提供必要的洞察力，同时几乎没有（或没有）额外的实验负担。我们希望这种观点将更多地使用更好的指标，改进报告，并最终帮助生物纳米科学向更定量的领域过渡。我们提出了替代指标，可以提供必要的洞察力，同时几乎没有（或没有）额外的实验负担。我们希望这种观点将更多地使用更好的指标，改进报告，并最终帮助生物纳米科学向更定量的领域过渡。