1079 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16647696)
1. 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]
2. An evaluation of the mode of action framework for mutagenic carcinogens case study: Cyclophosphamide.
McCarroll N; Keshava N; Cimino M; Chu M; Dearfield K; Keshava C; Kligerman A; Owen R; Protzel A; Putzrath R; Schoeny R
Environ Mol Mutagen; 2008 Mar; 49(2):117-31. PubMed ID: 18240158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Mode of action in relevance of rodent liver tumors to human cancer risk.
Holsapple MP; Pitot HC; Cohen SM; Boobis AR; Klaunig JE; Pastoor T; Dellarco VL; Dragan YP
Toxicol Sci; 2006 Jan; 89(1):51-6. PubMed ID: 16221960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Biomarkers in Czech workers exposed to 1,3-butadiene: a transitional epidemiologic study.
Albertini RJ; Srám RJ; Vacek PM; Lynch J; Nicklas JA; van Sittert NJ; Boogaard PJ; Henderson RF; Swenberg JA; Tates AD; Ward JB; Wright M; Ammenheuser MM; Binkova B; Blackwell W; de Zwart FA; Krako D; Krone J; Megens H; Musilová P; Rajská G; Ranasinghe A; Rosenblatt JI; Rössner P; Rubes J; Sullivan L; Upton P; Zwinderman AH
Res Rep Health Eff Inst; 2003 Jun; (116):1-141; discussion 143-62. PubMed ID: 12931846
[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. 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]
7. Molecular epidemiological studies in 1,3-butadiene exposed Czech workers: female-male comparisons.
Albertini RJ; Sram RJ; Vacek PM; Lynch J; Rossner P; Nicklas JA; McDonald JD; Boysen G; Georgieva N; Swenberg JA
Chem Biol Interact; 2007 Mar; 166(1-3):63-77. PubMed ID: 16949064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. A cancer risk assessment of di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate: application of the new U.S. EPA Risk Assessment Guidelines.
Doull J; Cattley R; Elcombe C; Lake BG; Swenberg J; Wilkinson C; Williams G; van Gemert M
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1999 Jun; 29(3):327-57. PubMed ID: 10388618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. Chloroform mode of action: implications for cancer risk assessment.
Golden RJ; Holm SE; Robinson DE; Julkunen PH; Reese EA
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1997 Oct; 26(2):142-55. PubMed ID: 9356278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Formaldehyde and glutaraldehyde and nasal cytotoxicity: case study within the context of the 2006 IPCS Human Framework for the Analysis of a cancer mode of action for humans.
McGregor D; Bolt H; Cogliano V; Richter-Reichhelm HB
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2006; 36(10):821-35. PubMed ID: 17118731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Toxicogenomics and cancer risk assessment: a framework for key event analysis and dose-response assessment for nongenotoxic carcinogens.
Bercu JP; Jolly RA; Flagella KM; Baker TK; Romero P; Stevens JL
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2010 Dec; 58(3):369-81. PubMed ID: 20801182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Environmental and chemical carcinogenesis.
Wogan GN; Hecht SS; Felton JS; Conney AH; Loeb LA
Semin Cancer Biol; 2004 Dec; 14(6):473-86. PubMed ID: 15489140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cancer dose--response assessment for acrylonitrile based upon rodent brain tumor incidence: use of epidemiologic, mechanistic, and pharmacokinetic support for nonlinearity.
Kirman CR; Gargas ML; Marsh GM; Strother DE; Klaunig JE; Collins JJ; Deskin R
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Oct; 43(1):85-103. PubMed ID: 16099568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Reducing uncertainty in risk assessment by using specific knowledge to replace default options.
McClellan RO
Drug Metab Rev; 1996; 28(1-2):149-79. PubMed ID: 8744594
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Mechanistic data and cancer risk assessment: the need for quantitative molecular endpoints.
Preston RJ
Environ Mol Mutagen; 2005; 45(2-3):214-21. PubMed ID: 15645441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
