WP1 developed and characterised a diverse portfolio of metal oxide, multi-element and silica nanoparticles, lipid nanoparticles and liposomes. Feedback between material producers and measurement partners helped refine batches, select candidates and test their homogeneity, stability and measurand-specific performance.
WP1 used production evidence and cross-partner measurements to assess seven candidate systems and identify the two with the clearest route towards further development for a defined SAXS particle-size use.
Important limitations: DLS indicated aggregation-related changes in the hydrodynamic size of BAM-UCNP20, although SAXS and TEM did not show changes in primary particle size. No aggregation was detected for BAM-IONP10 by DLS over the assessed period. Particle number concentration carried substantially larger uncertainties, and extended stability studies were still in progress when D2 was submitted on 27 March 2026.
Scope note: these figures illustrate the broader characterisation work documented in D1. They are not presented as images of BAM-IONP10 or BAM-UCNP20, and no equivalence with those two prioritised candidate systems should be inferred.
The FeraSpin™ R work shows why a scientifically valuable nanomedicine model is not automatically the easiest candidate for metrologically traceable reference use.
The study examined how the volume and analytical scale sampled can affect conclusions about particle size and chemical homogeneity in a complex iron oxide nanoparticle system.
It provides a strong scientific case study for nanomedicine characterisation while also illustrating why broad or aggregated particle-size distributions make robust, traceable SAXS value assignment more demanding than for more uniform systems.
The public roadmap translates WP1 evidence into future priorities. D1 and D2 document the candidate portfolio and the subsequent homogeneity, stability and uncertainty work, but no public download is offered here unless an official public record is confirmed.
The roadmap turns WP1 evidence into a practical sequence of priorities for nanomedicine reference material development. It clarifies what can be used or explored now, which material and measurement gaps need further work, and when the evidence could justify a longer-term RM or CRM route. It is a prioritisation tool, not a catalogue of certified materials.
It also explains a central trade-off: uniform particles are easier to characterise with traceable methods, while real nanomedicines are often more complex, polydisperse, proprietary or sensitive to storage and dilution. The roadmap uses that trade-off to frame realistic next steps.
Availability status: the roadmap is public. A sustainable public provision route for BAM-IONP10 and BAM-UCNP20 has not yet been confirmed.
WP1 showed that reference material development is a sequence of linked decisions. The route starts with the measurement need, not with a material that happens to be available.
The final route must also account for demand, production capacity, intellectual property, cost and long-term availability.
Surface chemistry makes this logic especially visible: the “surface” is not a single universal value. The measurand, signal-generation principle, sample preparation, validation strategy and intended decision must be considered together. Academy 5 shows how experts apply this purpose-first approach.
Presented by Dr Ute Resch-Genger, BAM.
“If you know what you want, this could save you a lot of time.” Dr Ute Resch-Genger, METRINO Academy Session 5
METRINO aimed to make measurements more reliable and useful for nanomedicine. WP1 addressed the material foundation of that challenge: producing nanomedicine-relevant systems, characterising them, and determining which could support a clearly defined measurement purpose.
D1 records a feedback loop between material producers and measurement partners. Characterisation results informed new batches and helped narrow the candidate portfolio.
A material cannot be selected only from its formulation or manufacturing data. Its suitability depends on how well the intended measurands can be assigned.
FeraSpin™ R provided a product-relevant case study, but its complexity made robust, traceable SAXS size assignment particularly demanding.
More uniform systems such as BAM-IONP10 and BAM-UCNP20 offer a practical foundation for establishing traceable measurements before more complex formulations can be addressed.
BAM-UCNP20 showed changes in hydrodynamic size by DLS, while its primary particle size remained stable by SAXS and TEM.
The measurand, method and conditions must accompany the conclusion so users understand exactly which property remained stable and which did not.
A candidate must combine producibility with measurand-specific homogeneity, stability and a realistic route to robust value assignment.
WP1 redirected advanced evaluation towards candidates with more uniform size distributions and a more realistic path to metrologically traceable use.
The open dataset, publication, roadmap and Academy replay can already support analysis, planning and training. The candidate materials and non-public deliverables require a separately confirmed access route.
What is not available yet: BAM-IONP10 and BAM-UCNP20 remain candidate systems. A sustainable public provision route has not been confirmed, and no public link to D1 or D2 is provided without an official authorised record.
[Approved quotation on how a laboratory, RM developer or nanomedicine stakeholder expects to use the WP1 results.][Name, role and organisation - WP leader perspective or external user perspective]
WP1 leader, BAM
Head of the Biophotonics Division at BAM, with expertise in optical metrology, surface chemistry, nanoparticle characterisation and reference material development.
The METRINO project has received funding from the European Partnership on Metrology (Grant #22HLT04), co-financed from the European Union’s Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Programme and by the Participating States. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or EURAMET. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.