160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10049796)
1. A new highly specific method for predicting the carcinogenic potential of pharmaceuticals in rodents using enhanced MCASE QSAR-ES software.
Matthews EJ; Contrera JF
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1998 Dec; 28(3):242-64. PubMed ID: 10049796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Prediction of rodent carcinogenic potential of naturally occurring chemicals in the human diet using high-throughput QSAR predictive modeling.
Valerio LG; Arvidson KB; Chanderbhan RF; Contrera JF
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2007 Jul; 222(1):1-16. PubMed ID: 17482223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of MC4PC and MDL-QSAR rodent carcinogenicity predictions and the enhancement of predictive performance by combining QSAR models.
Contrera JF; Kruhlak NL; Matthews EJ; Benz RD
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2007 Dec; 49(3):172-82. PubMed ID: 17703860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Structure-activity relationship analysis tools: validation and applicability in predicting carcinogens.
Mayer J; Cheeseman MA; Twaroski ML
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Feb; 50(1):50-8. PubMed ID: 18023949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Computer-aided rodent carcinogenicity prediction.
Lagunin AA; Dearden JC; Filimonov DA; Poroikov VV
Mutat Res; 2005 Oct; 586(2):138-46. PubMed ID: 16112600
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. ESP: a method to predict toxicity and pharmacological properties of chemicals using multiple MCASE databases.
Klopman G; Chakravarti SK; Zhu H; Ivanov JM; Saiakhov RD
J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2004; 44(2):704-15. PubMed ID: 15032553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Structure alerts for carcinogenicity, and the Salmonella assay system: a novel insight through the chemical relational databases technology.
Benigni R; Bossa C
Mutat Res; 2008; 659(3):248-61. PubMed ID: 18621573
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Testing computational toxicology models with phytochemicals.
Valerio LG; Arvidson KB; Busta E; Minnier BL; Kruhlak NL; Benz RD
Mol Nutr Food Res; 2010 Feb; 54(2):186-94. PubMed ID: 20024931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens II. Further analysis of mammalian cell results, relative predictivity and tumour profiles.
Kirkland D; Aardema M; Müller L; Makoto H
Mutat Res; 2006 Sep; 608(1):29-42. PubMed ID: 16769241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens I. Sensitivity, specificity and relative predictivity.
Kirkland D; Aardema M; Henderson L; Müller L
Mutat Res; 2005 Jul; 584(1-2):1-256. PubMed ID: 15979392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The results of assays in Drosophila as indicators of exposure to carcinogens.
Vogel EW; Graf U; Frei HJ; Nivard MM
IARC Sci Publ; 1999; (146):427-70. PubMed ID: 10353398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. An analysis of genetic toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity, and carcinogenicity data: II. Identification of genotoxicants, reprotoxicants, and carcinogens using in silico methods.
Matthews EJ; Kruhlak NL; Cimino MC; Benz RD; Contrera JF
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2006 Mar; 44(2):97-110. PubMed ID: 16352383
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Searching for an enhanced predictive tool for mutagenicity.
Klopman G; Zhu H; Fuller MA; Saiakhov RD
SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2004 Aug; 15(4):251-63. PubMed ID: 15370416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A topological substructural approach applied to the computational prediction of rodent carcinogenicity.
Helguera AM; Cabrera Pérez MA; González MP; Ruiz RM; González Díaz H
Bioorg Med Chem; 2005 Apr; 13(7):2477-88. PubMed ID: 15755650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Predicting the carcinogenic potential of pharmaceuticals in rodents using molecular structural similarity and E-state indices.
Contrera JF; Matthews EJ; Daniel Benz R
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2003 Dec; 38(3):243-59. PubMed ID: 14623477
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Safety and nutritional assessment of GM plants and derived food and feed: the role of animal feeding trials.
EFSA GMO Panel Working Group on Animal Feeding Trials
Food Chem Toxicol; 2008 Mar; 46 Suppl 1():S2-70. PubMed ID: 18328408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Assessment of the sensitivity of the computational programs DEREK, TOPKAT, and MCASE in the prediction of the genotoxicity of pharmaceutical molecules.
Snyder RD; Pearl GS; Mandakas G; Choy WN; Goodsaid F; Rosenblum IY
Environ Mol Mutagen; 2004; 43(3):143-58. PubMed ID: 15065202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. In silico screening of chemicals for bacterial mutagenicity using electrotopological E-state indices and MDL QSAR software.
Contrera JF; Matthews EJ; Kruhlak NL; Benz RD
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Dec; 43(3):313-23. PubMed ID: 16242226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Are tumor incidence rates from chronic bioassays telling us what we need to know about carcinogens?
Gaylor DW
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Mar; 41(2):128-33. PubMed ID: 15698536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Improved in silico prediction of carcinogenic potency (TD50) and the risk specific dose (RSD) adjusted Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) for genotoxic chemicals and pharmaceutical impurities.
Contrera JF
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2011 Feb; 59(1):133-41. PubMed ID: 20933038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
