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 *

87 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17040100)

  • 1. Computational prediction of the chromosome-damaging potential of chemicals.
    Rothfuss A; Steger-Hartmann T; Heinrich N; Wichard J
    Chem Res Toxicol; 2006 Oct; 19(10):1313-9. PubMed ID: 17040100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Assessment of the sensitivity of the computational programs DEREK, TOPKAT, and MCASE in the prediction of the genotoxicity of pharmaceutical molecules.
    Snyder RD; Pearl GS; Mandakas G; Choy WN; Goodsaid F; Rosenblum IY
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2004; 43(3):143-58. PubMed ID: 15065202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Identifying the structural requirements for chromosomal aberration by incorporating molecular flexibility and metabolic activation of chemicals.
    Mekenyan O; Todorov M; Serafimova R; Stoeva S; Aptula A; Finking R; Jacob E
    Chem Res Toxicol; 2007 Dec; 20(12):1927-41. PubMed ID: 18052113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Strategy for genotoxicity testing: hazard identification and risk assessment in relation to in vitro testing.
    Thybaud V; Aardema M; Clements J; Dearfield K; Galloway S; Hayashi M; Jacobson-Kram D; Kirkland D; MacGregor JT; Marzin D; Ohyama W; Schuler M; Suzuki H; Zeiger E;
    Mutat Res; 2007 Feb; 627(1):41-58. PubMed ID: 17126066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. In silico prediction of chromosome damage: comparison of three (Q)SAR models.
    Morita T; Shigeta Y; Kawamura T; Fujita Y; Honda H; Honma M
    Mutagenesis; 2019 Mar; 34(1):91-100. PubMed ID: 30085209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A maximum common subgraph kernel method for predicting the chromosome aberration test.
    Mohr J; Jain B; Sutter A; Laak AT; Steger-Hartmann T; Heinrich N; Obermayer K
    J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Oct; 50(10):1821-38. PubMed ID: 20883013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Critical assessment of QSAR models of environmental toxicity against Tetrahymena pyriformis: focusing on applicability domain and overfitting by variable selection.
    Tetko IV; Sushko I; Pandey AK; Zhu H; Tropsha A; Papa E; Oberg T; Todeschini R; Fourches D; Varnek A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Sep; 48(9):1733-46. PubMed ID: 18729318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of DNA intercalation potential of pharmaceuticals and other chemicals by cell-based and three-dimensional computational approaches.
    Snyder RD; Ewing DE; Hendry LB
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2004; 44(2):163-73. PubMed ID: 15278920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A novel non-stochastic quadratic fingerprints-based approach for the 'in silico' discovery of new antitrypanosomal compounds.
    Montero-Torres A; Vega MC; Marrero-Ponce Y; Rolón M; Gómez-Barrio A; Escario JA; Arán VJ; Martínez-Fernández AR; Meneses-Marcel A
    Bioorg Med Chem; 2005 Nov; 13(22):6264-75. PubMed ID: 16115770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Automatic extraction of structural alerts for predicting chromosome aberrations of organic compounds.
    Estrada E; Molina E
    J Mol Graph Model; 2006 Nov; 25(3):275-88. PubMed ID: 16487735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Molecular modeling for screening environmental chemicals for estrogenicity: use of the toxicant-target approach.
    Rabinowitz JR; Little SB; Laws SC; Goldsmith MR
    Chem Res Toxicol; 2009 Sep; 22(9):1594-602. PubMed ID: 19715353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. hERG classification model based on a combination of support vector machine method and GRIND descriptors.
    Li Q; Jørgensen FS; Oprea T; Brunak S; Taboureau O
    Mol Pharm; 2008; 5(1):117-27. PubMed ID: 18197627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. DNA intercalative potential of marketed drugs testing positive in in vitro cytogenetics assays.
    Snyder RD; Ewing D; Hendry LB
    Mutat Res; 2006 Oct; 609(1):47-59. PubMed ID: 16857419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Identification of the structural requirements for mutagenicity by incorporating molecular flexibility and metabolic activation of chemicals I: TA100 model.
    Mekenyan O; Dimitrov S; Serafimova R; Thompson E; Kotov S; Dimitrova N; Walker JD
    Chem Res Toxicol; 2004 Jun; 17(6):753-66. PubMed ID: 15206896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluation of the Vitotox and RadarScreen assays for the rapid assessment of genotoxicity in the early research phase of drug development.
    Westerink WM; Stevenson JC; Lauwers A; Griffioen G; Horbach GJ; Schoonen WG
    Mutat Res; 2009 May; 676(1-2):113-30. PubMed ID: 19393335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Analysis of pharmacology data and the prediction of adverse drug reactions and off-target effects from chemical structure.
    Bender A; Scheiber J; Glick M; Davies JW; Azzaoui K; Hamon J; Urban L; Whitebread S; Jenkins JL
    ChemMedChem; 2007 Jun; 2(6):861-73. PubMed ID: 17477341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Use of computer-assisted prediction of toxic effects of chemical substances.
    Simon-Hettich B; Rothfuss A; Steger-Hartmann T
    Toxicology; 2006 Jul; 224(1-2):156-62. PubMed ID: 16707203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Integration of structure-activity relationship and artificial intelligence systems to improve in silico prediction of ames test mutagenicity.
    Mazzatorta P; Tran LA; Schilter B; Grigorov M
    J Chem Inf Model; 2007; 47(1):34-8. PubMed ID: 17238246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.