BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

400 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11453374)

  • 1. A simple method for quantitative risk assessment of non-threshold carcinogens based on the dose descriptor T25.
    Sanner T; Dybing E; Willems MI; Kroese ED
    Pharmacol Toxicol; 2001 Jun; 88(6):331-41. PubMed ID: 11453374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of carcinogen hazard characterisation based on animal studies and epidemiology.
    Sanner T; Dybing E
    Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol; 2005 Jan; 96(1):66-70. PubMed ID: 15667598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of carcinogenic and in vivo genotoxic potency estimates.
    Sanner T; Dybing E
    Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol; 2005 Feb; 96(2):131-9. PubMed ID: 15679476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Trichloroethylene cancer risk: simplified calculation of PBPK-based MCLs for cytotoxic end points.
    Bogen KT; Gold LS
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1997 Feb; 25(1):26-42. PubMed ID: 9056499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Regulatory cancer risk assessment based on a quick estimate of a benchmark dose derived from the maximum tolerated dose.
    Gaylor DW; Swirsky Gold L
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1998 Dec; 28(3):222-5. PubMed ID: 10049793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Ethyl methanesulfonate toxicity in Viracept--a comprehensive human risk assessment based on threshold data for genotoxicity.
    Müller L; Gocke E; Lavé T; Pfister T
    Toxicol Lett; 2009 Nov; 190(3):317-29. PubMed ID: 19443141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Scientific analysis of the proposed uses of the T25 dose descriptor in chemical carcinogen regulation.
    Roberts RA; Crump KS; Lutz WK; Wiegand HJ; Williams GM; Harrison PT; Purchase IF
    Arch Toxicol; 2001 Nov; 75(9):507-12. PubMed ID: 11760810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Development of a unit risk factor for 1,3-butadiene based on an updated carcinogenic toxicity assessment.
    Grant RL; Haney J; Curry AL; Honeycutt M
    Risk Anal; 2009 Dec; 29(12):1726-42. PubMed ID: 19878488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluation of the carcinogenicity of 1,1-dichloroethylene (vinylidene chloride).
    Roberts SM; Jordan KE; Warren DA; Britt JK; James RC
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2002 Feb; 35(1):44-55. PubMed ID: 11846635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Application of BMD models in quantitative evaluation of carcinogenic risk].
    Szymczak W
    Med Pr; 1998; 49(6):579-87. PubMed ID: 10204147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Risk assessment of dietary exposures to compounds that are genotoxic and carcinogenic--an overview.
    Dybing E; O'Brien J; Renwick AG; Sanner T
    Toxicol Lett; 2008 Aug; 180(2):110-7. PubMed ID: 18584977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Deriving a data-based interspecies assessment factor using the NOAEL and the benchmark dose approach.
    Bokkers BG; Slob W
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2007 Jun; 37(5):355-73. PubMed ID: 17612951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Cancer risk assessment for 1,3-butadiene: data integration opportunities.
    Preston RJ
    Chem Biol Interact; 2007 Mar; 166(1-3):150-5. PubMed ID: 16647696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Acrylamide: review of toxicity data and dose-response analyses for cancer and noncancer effects.
    Shipp A; Lawrence G; Gentry R; McDonald T; Bartow H; Bounds J; Macdonald N; Clewell H; Allen B; Van Landingham C
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2006; 36(6-7):481-608. PubMed ID: 16973444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The benchmark dose method--review of available models, and recommendations for application in health risk assessment.
    Filipsson AF; Sand S; Nilsson J; Victorin K
    Crit Rev Toxicol; 2003; 33(5):505-42. PubMed ID: 14594105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Analysis of in vivo mutation data can inform cancer risk assessment.
    Moore MM; Heflich RH; Haber LT; Allen BC; Shipp AM; Kodell RL
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Jul; 51(2):151-61. PubMed ID: 18321622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Addressing nonlinearity in the exposure-response relationship for a genotoxic carcinogen: cancer potency estimates for ethylene oxide.
    Kirman CR; Sweeney LM; Teta MJ; Sielken RL; Valdez-Flores C; Albertini RJ; Gargas ML
    Risk Anal; 2004 Oct; 24(5):1165-83. PubMed ID: 15563286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Carcinogenicity of acetaldehyde in alcoholic beverages: risk assessment outside ethanol metabolism.
    Lachenmeier DW; Kanteres F; Rehm J
    Addiction; 2009 Apr; 104(4):533-50. PubMed ID: 19335652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 20.