These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

275 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15291823)

  • 1. Determination of skin irritation potential in the human 4-h patch test.
    Basketter DA; York M; McFadden JP; Robinson MK
    Contact Dermatitis; 2004 Jul; 51(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 15291823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Irritant contact dermatitis. Part II. Evaluation evaluation of skin irritation potential of chemicals].
    Chomiczewska D; Kieć-Swierczyńska M; Krecisz B
    Med Pr; 2009; 60(3):209-14. PubMed ID: 19746889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of modifications of the traditional patch test in assessing the chemical irritation potential of feminine hygiene products.
    Farage MA; Meyer S; Walter D
    Skin Res Technol; 2004 May; 10(2):73-84. PubMed ID: 15059174
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Development of a sensitive test method to evaluate mechanical irritation potential on mucosal skin.
    Farage MA; Meyer S; Walter D
    Skin Res Technol; 2004 May; 10(2):85-95. PubMed ID: 15059175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of human skin irritation patch test data with in vitro skin irritation assays and animal data.
    Jírová D; Basketter D; Liebsch M; Bendová H; Kejlová K; Marriott M; Kandárová H
    Contact Dermatitis; 2010 Feb; 62(2):109-16. PubMed ID: 20136894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparative assessment of the acute skin irritation potential of detergent formulations using a novel human 4-h patch test method.
    Robinson MK; Kruszewski FH; Al-Atrash J; Blazka ME; Gingell R; Heitfeld FA; Mallon D; Snyder NK; Swanson JE; Casterton PL
    Food Chem Toxicol; 2005 Dec; 43(12):1703-12. PubMed ID: 16026914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. In vitro irritation models and immune reactions.
    Gibbs S
    Skin Pharmacol Physiol; 2009; 22(2):103-13. PubMed ID: 19188758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Behind-the-Knee test: an efficient model for evaluating mechanical and chemical irritation.
    Farage MA
    Skin Res Technol; 2006 May; 12(2):73-82. PubMed ID: 16626379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The usefulness of toxicogenomics for predicting acute skin irritation on in vitro reconstructed human epidermis.
    Borlon C; Godard P; Eskes C; Hartung T; Zuang V; Toussaint O
    Toxicology; 2007 Nov; 241(3):157-66. PubMed ID: 17928126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The vulvar epithelium differs from the skin: implications for cutaneous testing to address topical vulvar exposures.
    Farage M; Maibach HI
    Contact Dermatitis; 2004 Oct; 51(4):201-9. PubMed ID: 15500670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Skin irritation: prevalence, variability, and regulatory classification of existing in vivo data from industrial chemicals.
    Hoffmann S; Cole T; Hartung T
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Apr; 41(3):159-66. PubMed ID: 15748793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Harmonization of thresholds for primary skin irritation from results of human repeated insult patch tests and laboratory animal skin irritation tests.
    Tardiff RG; Hubner RP; Graves CG
    J Appl Toxicol; 2003; 23(4):279-81. PubMed ID: 12884413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. In vitro skin irritation testing on reconstituted human epidermis: reproducibility for 50 chemicals tested with two protocols.
    Tornier C; Rosdy M; Maibach HI
    Toxicol In Vitro; 2006 Jun; 20(4):401-16. PubMed ID: 16229985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluation of the medical devices benchmark materials in the controlled human patch testing and in the RhE in vitro skin irritation protocol.
    Kandárová H; Bendova H; Letasiova S; Coleman KP; De Jong WH; Jírova D
    Toxicol In Vitro; 2018 Aug; 50():433-438. PubMed ID: 29462660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Validity and ethics of the human 4-h patch test as an alternative method to assess acute skin irritation potential.
    Robinson MK; McFadden JP; Basketter DA
    Contact Dermatitis; 2001 Jul; 45(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 11422260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. In vitro skin irritation: facts and future. State of the art review of mechanisms and models.
    Welss T; Basketter DA; Schröder KR
    Toxicol In Vitro; 2004 Jun; 18(3):231-43. PubMed ID: 15046769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Use of the cytosensor microphysiometer to predict results of a 21-day cumulative irritation patch test in humans.
    Landin WE; Mun GC; Nims RW; Harbell JW
    Toxicol In Vitro; 2007 Sep; 21(6):1165-73. PubMed ID: 17475442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A feasibility study developing an integrated testing strategy assessing skin irritation potential of chemicals.
    Hoffmann S; Saliner AG; Patlewicz G; Eskes C; Zuang V; Worth AP
    Toxicol Lett; 2008 Jul; 180(1):9-20. PubMed ID: 18585875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Read-across to rank skin sensitization potential: subcategories for the Michael acceptor domain.
    Schultz TW; Rogers K; Aptula AO
    Contact Dermatitis; 2009 Jan; 60(1):21-31. PubMed ID: 19125718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Skin irritation and sensitization: mechanisms and new approaches for risk assessment. 1. Skin irritation.
    Fluhr JW; Darlenski R; Angelova-Fischer I; Tsankov N; Basketter D
    Skin Pharmacol Physiol; 2008; 21(3):124-35. PubMed ID: 18523410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.