840 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16555967)
1. Animal carcinogenicity studies: implications for the REACH system.
Knight A; Bailey J; Balcombe J
Altern Lab Anim; 2006 Mar; 34 Suppl 1():139-47. PubMed ID: 16555967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Animal carcinogenicity studies: 1. Poor human predictivity.
Knight A; Bailey J; Balcombe J
Altern Lab Anim; 2006 Feb; 34(1):19-27. PubMed ID: 16522147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Epidemiological and experimental applications to occupational cancer prevention.
Vainio H; Hemminki K
J UOEH; 1989 Mar; 11 Suppl():323-45. PubMed ID: 2664947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of reduced protocols for carcinogenicity testing of chemicals: report of a joint EPA/NIEHS workshop.
Lai DY; Baetcke KP; Vu VT; Cotruvo JA; Eustis SL
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1994 Apr; 19(2):183-201. PubMed ID: 8041916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Animal carcinogenicity studies: 2. Obstacles to extrapolation of data to humans.
Knight A; Bailey J; Balcombe J
Altern Lab Anim; 2006 Feb; 34(1):29-38. PubMed ID: 16522148
[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 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]
8. Evaluation of the utility of the lifetime mouse bioassay in the identification of cancer hazards for humans.
Osimitz TG; Droege W; Boobis AR; Lake BG
Food Chem Toxicol; 2013 Oct; 60():550-62. PubMed ID: 23954551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The transgenic mouse assay as an alternative test method for regulatory carcinogenicity studies--implications for REACH.
Wells MY; Williams ES
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2009 Mar; 53(2):150-5. PubMed ID: 19126422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. NTP toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of 3,3',4,4',5-pentachlorobiphenyl (PCB 126) (CAS No. 57465-28-8) in female Harlan Sprague-Dawley rats (Gavage Studies).
National Toxicology Program
Natl Toxicol Program Tech Rep Ser; 2006 Jan; (520):4-246. PubMed ID: 16628245
[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. Development of quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models to predict the carcinogenic potency of chemicals. II. Using oral slope factor as a measure of carcinogenic potency.
Wang NC; Venkatapathy R; Bruce RM; Moudgal C
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2011 Mar; 59(2):215-26. PubMed ID: 20951756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Use of mouse liver tumor data in risk assessments performed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Beal DD
Prog Clin Biol Res; 1990; 331():5-18. PubMed ID: 2179964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Carcinogenic chemical-response "fingerprint" for male F344 rats exposed to a series of 195 chemicals: implications for predicting carcinogens with transgenic models.
Johnson FM
Environ Mol Mutagen; 1999; 34(4):234-45. PubMed ID: 10618171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Carcinogenicity categorization of chemicals-new aspects to be considered in a European perspective.
Bolt HM; Foth H; Hengstler JG; Degen GH
Toxicol Lett; 2004 Jun; 151(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 15177638
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Databases applicable to quantitative hazard/risk assessment--towards a predictive systems toxicology.
Waters M; Jackson M
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2008 Nov; 233(1):34-44. PubMed ID: 18675838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The weight of the evidence among group C carcinogens.
Engler R; Rinde E; Frick C; Quest J
Qual Assur; 1991 Oct; 1(1):51-69. PubMed ID: 1669970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Alleged misconceptions' distort perceptions of environmental cancer risks.
Tomatis L; Melnick RL; Haseman J; Barrett JC; Huff J
FASEB J; 2001 Jan; 15(1):195-203. PubMed ID: 11149907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
