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 *

149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1553407)

  • 1. Problems remain to be resolved in the area of quantitative risk assessment.
    Rall DP
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1992 Feb; 15(1):104-5. PubMed ID: 1553407
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The rodent bone marrow micronucleus assay: contrast between its sensitivity to human carcinogens and its insensitivity to NTP rodent carcinogens.
    Ashby J; Tinwell H
    Mutat Res; 1996 Jun; 352(1-2):181-4. PubMed ID: 8676908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The use of mechanistic data in the risk assessments of ten chemicals: an introduction to the chemical-specific reviews.
    International Expert Panel on Carcinogen Risk Assessment
    Pharmacol Ther; 1996; 71(1-2):1-5. PubMed ID: 8910946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Activity of human carcinogens in the Salmonella and rodent bone marrow cytogenetic tests.
    Nersessians AK
    Mutat Res; 1992 Apr; 281(4):239-43. PubMed ID: 1373216
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Mutagenic specificity of chemical carcinogens as determined by studies of single DNA adducts.
    Grollman AP; Shibutani S
    IARC Sci Publ; 1994; (125):385-97. PubMed ID: 7806328
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Risk assessment problems in chemical oncogenesis.
    Hottendorf GH
    Prog Drug Res; 1987; 31():257-72. PubMed ID: 3326032
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Setting air quality standards for carcinogens: an alternative to mathematical quantitative risk assessment-discussion paper.
    Maynard RL; Cameron KM; Fielder R; McDonald A; Wadge A
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1997 Aug; 26(1 Pt 2):S60-70. PubMed ID: 9380838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Contribution of toxicology towards risk assessment of carcinogens.
    Kroes R
    Arch Toxicol; 1987; 60(1-3):224-8. PubMed ID: 3304212
    [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. Quantitative approaches for cancer risk assessment.
    Risk Anal; 1985 Mar; 5(1):5-8. PubMed ID: 3843674
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Carcinogenicity of some aromatic amines, organic dyes, and related exposures.
    Baan R; Straif K; Grosse Y; Secretan B; El Ghissassi F; Bouvard V; Benbrahim-Tallaa L; Cogliano V;
    Lancet Oncol; 2008 Apr; 9(4):322-3. PubMed ID: 18405853
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Empirical approaches to risk estimation and prediction.
    Krewski D; Cardis E; Zeise L; Feron VJ
    IARC Sci Publ; 1999; (131):131-78. PubMed ID: 10505296
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Risk assessment of carcinogens in food.
    Barlow S; Schlatter J
    Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2010 Mar; 243(2):180-90. PubMed ID: 19909764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Transformation of BALB/c-3T3 cells: V. Transformation responses of 168 chemicals compared with mutagenicity in Salmonella and carcinogenicity in rodent bioassays.
    Matthews EJ; Spalding JW; Tennant RW
    Environ Health Perspect; 1993 Jul; 101 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):347-482. PubMed ID: 8243403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Neonatal mouse model: review of methods and results.
    McClain RM; Keller D; Casciano D; Fu P; MacDonald J; Popp J; Sagartz J
    Toxicol Pathol; 2001; 29 Suppl():128-37. PubMed ID: 11695548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Hazard assessment of chemical carcinogens: the impact of hormesis.
    Teeguarden JG; Dragan Y; Pitot HC
    J Appl Toxicol; 2000; 20(2):113-20. PubMed ID: 10715608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mechanistic considerations in risk assessment for epigenetic tumor-promoting carcinogens.
    Williams GM; Whysner J
    Prog Clin Biol Res; 1995; 391():369-83. PubMed ID: 8532729
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Statistics for risk assessment of chemical carcinogens.
    Chen JJ; Chen YJ; Cheng KF
    J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev; 2007; 25(4):281-312. PubMed ID: 18000784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The linearized multistage model and the future of quantitative risk assessment.
    Crump KS
    Hum Exp Toxicol; 1996 Oct; 15(10):787-98. PubMed ID: 8906427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.