204 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17462838)
1. Development of a QSAR for worst case estimates of acute toxicity of chemically reactive compounds.
Freidig AP; Dekkers S; Verwei M; Zvinavashe E; Bessems JG; van de Sandt JJ
Toxicol Lett; 2007 May; 170(3):214-22. PubMed ID: 17462838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A QSAR for baseline toxicity: validation, domain of application, and prediction.
Oberg T
Chem Res Toxicol; 2004 Dec; 17(12):1630-7. PubMed ID: 15606139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Qsar investigation of a large data set for fish, algae and Daphnia toxicity.
Lessigiarska I; Wortha AP; Sokull-Klüttgen B; Jeram S; Dearden JC; Netzeva TI; Cronin MT
SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2004; 15(5-6):413-31. PubMed ID: 15669699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Mode of action-based local QSAR modeling for the prediction of acute toxicity in the fathead minnow.
Yuan H; Wang YY; Cheng YY
J Mol Graph Model; 2007 Jul; 26(1):327-35. PubMed ID: 17224289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Impact of bioavailability on the correlation between in vitro cytotoxic and in vivo acute fish toxic concentrations of chemicals.
Gülden M; Seibert H
Aquat Toxicol; 2005 May; 72(4):327-37. PubMed ID: 15848252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. On the number of EINECS compounds that can be covered by (Q)SAR models for acute toxicity.
Zvinavashe E; Murk AJ; Rietjens IM
Toxicol Lett; 2009 Jan; 184(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 19041378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An alternative approach for the safety evaluation of new and existing chemicals, an exercise in integrated testing.
Gubbels-van Hal WM; Blaauboer BJ; Barentsen HM; Hoitink MA; Meerts IA; van der Hoeven JC
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Aug; 42(3):284-95. PubMed ID: 15979772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Modelling acute oral mammalian toxicity. 1. Definition of a quantifiable baseline effect.
Koleva YK; Cronin MT; Madden JC; Schwöbel JA
Toxicol In Vitro; 2011 Oct; 25(7):1281-93. PubMed ID: 21557997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Per- and polyfluoro toxicity (LC(50) inhalation) study in rat and mouse using QSAR modeling.
Bhhatarai B; Gramatica P
Chem Res Toxicol; 2010 Mar; 23(3):528-39. PubMed ID: 20095582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of in vitro and in vivo acute fish toxicity in relation to toxicant mode of action.
Knauer K; Lampert C; Gonzalez-Valero J
Chemosphere; 2007 Jul; 68(8):1435-41. PubMed ID: 17512969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Skin irritation: prevalence, variability, and regulatory classification of existing in vivo data from industrial chemicals.
Hoffmann S; Cole T; Hartung T
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Apr; 41(3):159-66. PubMed ID: 15748793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Strengths and limitations of using repeat-dose toxicity studies to predict effects on fertility.
Dent MP
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2007 Aug; 48(3):241-58. PubMed ID: 17512650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. [Perspective of predictive toxicity assessment of in vivo repeated dose toxicity using structural activity relationship].
Ono A
Kokuritsu Iyakuhin Shokuhin Eisei Kenkyusho Hokoku; 2010; (128):44-9. PubMed ID: 21381395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Towards more efficient testing strategies--analyzing the efficiency of toxicity data requirements in relation to the criteria for classification and labelling.
Nordberg A; Rudén C; Hansson SO
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Apr; 50(3):412-9. PubMed ID: 18334276
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Development of quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models to predict the carcinogenic potency of chemicals I. Alternative toxicity measures as an estimator of carcinogenic potency.
Venkatapathy R; Wang CY; Bruce RM; Moudgal C
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2009 Jan; 234(2):209-21. PubMed ID: 18977375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Research perspectives for pre-screening alternatives to animal experimentation: on the relevance of cytotoxicity measurements, barrier passage determinations and high throughput screening in vitro to select potentially hazardous compounds in large sets of chemicals.
Walum E; Hedander J; Garberg P
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2005 Sep; 207(2 Suppl):393-7. PubMed ID: 15982691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Acutoxbase, an innovative database for in vitro acute toxicity studies.
Kinsner-Ovaskainen A; Rzepka R; Rudowski R; Coecke S; Cole T; Prieto P
Toxicol In Vitro; 2009 Apr; 23(3):476-85. PubMed ID: 19159672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
