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 *

230 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17030370)

  • 21. A statistical evaluation of toxicity study designs for the estimation of the benchmark dose in continuous endpoints.
    Slob W; Moerbeek M; Rauniomaa E; Piersma AH
    Toxicol Sci; 2005 Mar; 84(1):167-85. PubMed ID: 15483190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Health assessment of phosgene: approaches for derivation of reference concentration.
    Gift JS; McGaughy R; Singh DV; Sonawane B
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Jun; 51(1):98-107. PubMed ID: 18440110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. An analysis of the risk of exceeding the acceptable or tolerable daily intake.
    Renwick AG; Walker R
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1993 Dec; 18(3):463-80. PubMed ID: 8128007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Introduction to benchmark dose methods and U.S. EPA's benchmark dose software (BMDS) version 2.1.1.
    Davis JA; Gift JS; Zhao QJ
    Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2011 Jul; 254(2):181-91. PubMed ID: 21034758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Proposal of new uncertainty factor application to derive tolerable daily intake.
    Hasegawa R; Hirata-Koizumi M; Dourson ML; Parker A; Sweeney LM; Nishikawa A; Yoshida M; Ono A; Hirose A
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2010 Nov; 58(2):237-42. PubMed ID: 20561553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. A probabilistic framework for non-cancer risk assessment.
    Chen JJ; Moon H; Kodell RL
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2007 Jun; 48(1):45-50. PubMed ID: 17166641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Benchmark Dose Workshop: criteria for use of a benchmark dose to estimate a reference dose.
    Barnes DG; Daston GP; Evans JS; Jarabek AM; Kavlock RJ; Kimmel CA; Park C; Spitzer HL
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1995 Apr; 21(2):296-306. PubMed ID: 7644719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Evaluation of the benchmark dose for point of departure determination for a variety of chemical classes in applied regulatory settings.
    Izadi H; Grundy JE; Bose R
    Risk Anal; 2012 May; 32(5):830-5. PubMed ID: 22126138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Comparing experimental designs for benchmark dose calculations for continuous endpoints.
    Kuljus K; von Rosen D; Sand S; Victorin K
    Risk Anal; 2006 Aug; 26(4):1031-43. PubMed ID: 16948695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Does EU legislation allow the use of the Benchmark Dose (BMD) approach for risk assessment?
    Brandon EF; Bulder AS; van Engelen JG; Mahieu CM; Mennes WC; Pronk ME; Rietveld AG; van de Ven BM; Ten Voorde SE; Wolterink G; Slob W; Zeilmaker MJ; Bessems JG
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2013 Nov; 67(2):182-8. PubMed ID: 23871753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Quantalization of continuous data for benchmark dose estimation.
    Gaylor DW
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1996 Dec; 24(3):246-50. PubMed ID: 8975754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Alternatives for a risk assessment on chronic noncancer effects from oral exposure to trichloroethylene.
    Barton HA; Das S
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1996 Dec; 24(3):269-85. PubMed ID: 8975757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Calculation of benchmark doses from teratology data.
    Auton TR
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1994 Apr; 19(2):152-67. PubMed ID: 8041913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The application of non-default uncertainty factors in the U.S. EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). Part I: UF(L), UF(S), and "other uncertainty factors".
    Stedeford T; Zhao QJ; Dourson ML; Banasik M; Hsu CH
    J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev; 2007; 25(3):245-79. PubMed ID: 17763048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Benchmark dose approaches in chemical health risk assessment in relation to number and distress of laboratory animals.
    Oberg M
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2010 Dec; 58(3):451-4. PubMed ID: 20800084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Identification of a critical dose level for risk assessment: developments in benchmark dose analysis of continuous endpoints.
    Sand S; von Rosen D; Victorin K; Filipsson AF
    Toxicol Sci; 2006 Mar; 90(1):241-51. PubMed ID: 16322076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. The Viracept (nelfinavir)--ethyl methanesulfonate case: a threshold risk assessment for human exposure to a genotoxic drug contamination?
    Lutz WK
    Toxicol Lett; 2009 Nov; 190(3):239-42. PubMed ID: 19695319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. [Dietary risk assessment for pesticide residues in food of plant origin during the plant protection product's registration process].
    Struciński P; Góralczyk K; Czaja K; Hernik A; Korcz W; Ludwicki JK
    Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig; 2006; 57(4):303-15. PubMed ID: 17713193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.