435 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10618179)
1. Prediction of rodent carcinogenicity utilizing a battery of in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity tests.
Kim BS; Margolin BH
Environ Mol Mutagen; 1999; 34(4):297-304. PubMed ID: 10618179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. A core in vitro genotoxicity battery comprising the Ames test plus the in vitro micronucleus test is sufficient to detect rodent carcinogens and in vivo genotoxins.
Kirkland D; Reeve L; Gatehouse D; Vanparys P
Mutat Res; 2011 Mar; 721(1):27-73. PubMed ID: 21238603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Identification of rodent carcinogens and noncarcinogens using genetic toxicity tests: premises, promises, and performance.
Zeiger E
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1998 Oct; 28(2):85-95. PubMed ID: 9927558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Short-term tests for defining mutagenic carcinogens.
Waters MD; Stack HF; Jackson MA
IARC Sci Publ; 1999; (146):499-536. PubMed ID: 10353401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens III. Appropriate follow-up testing in vivo.
Kirkland D; Speit G
Mutat Res; 2008 Jul; 654(2):114-32. PubMed ID: 18585956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Testing strategies in mutagenicity and genetic toxicology: an appraisal of the guidelines of the European Scientific Committee for Cosmetics and Non-Food Products for the evaluation of hair dyes.
Kirkland DJ; Henderson L; Marzin D; Müller L; Parry JM; Speit G; Tweats DJ; Williams GM
Mutat Res; 2005 Dec; 588(2):88-105. PubMed ID: 16326131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. An analysis of genetic toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity, and carcinogenicity data: I. Identification of carcinogens using surrogate endpoints.
Matthews EJ; Kruhlak NL; Cimino MC; Benz RD; Contrera JF
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2006 Mar; 44(2):83-96. PubMed ID: 16386343
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Mouse bone marrow micronucleus assay: relationships with in vitro mutagenicity and rodent carcinogenicity.
Benigni R
J Toxicol Environ Health; 1995 Jul; 45(3):337-47. PubMed ID: 7609006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The comet assay with multiple mouse organs: comparison of comet assay results and carcinogenicity with 208 chemicals selected from the IARC monographs and U.S. NTP Carcinogenicity Database.
Sasaki YF; Sekihashi K; Izumiyama F; Nishidate E; Saga A; Ishida K; Tsuda S
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2000 Nov; 30(6):629-799. PubMed ID: 11145306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Predicting rodent carcinogenicity using potency measures of the in vitro sister chromatid exchange and chromosome aberration assays.
Schildcrout JS; Margolin BH; Zeiger E
Environ Mol Mutagen; 1999; 33(1):59-64. PubMed ID: 10037324
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Evaluation of the Salmonella umu test with 83 NTP chemicals.
Yasunaga K; Kiyonari A; Oikawa T; Abe N; Yoshikawa K
Environ Mol Mutagen; 2004; 44(4):329-45. PubMed ID: 15476194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The challenge of testing chemicals for potential carcinogenicity using multiple short-term assays: an analysis of a proposed test battery for hair dyes.
Rosenkranz HS; Cunningham SL; Mermelstein R; Cunningham AR
Mutat Res; 2007 Sep; 633(1):55-66. PubMed ID: 17625954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [The genotoxicity and carcinogenic potential of gastrofenzin].
Mirkova E
Eksp Med Morfol; 1994; 32(3-4):57-68. PubMed ID: 8857033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. In vitro mammalian cell genotoxicity assays: their use and interpretation.
McGregor D
Prog Clin Biol Res; 1990; 340B():159-69. PubMed ID: 2203003
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Analysis of published data for top concentration considerations in mammalian cell genotoxicity testing.
Parry JM; Parry E; Phrakonkham P; Corvi R
Mutagenesis; 2010 Nov; 25(6):531-8. PubMed ID: 20720196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The micronucleus test and NTP rodent carcinogens: not so many false negatives.
Galloway SM
Mutat Res; 1996 Jun; 352(1-2):185-8. PubMed ID: 8676909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of in vivo erythrocyte micronucleus and transgenic rodent gene mutation tests to detect rodent carcinogens.
Morita T; Hamada S; Masumura K; Wakata A; Maniwa J; Takasawa H; Yasunaga K; Hashizume T; Honma M
Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen; 2016 May; 802():1-29. PubMed ID: 27169373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
