2982 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17482223)
1. 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]
2. Testing computational toxicology models with phytochemicals.
Valerio LG; Arvidson KB; Busta E; Minnier BL; Kruhlak NL; Benz RD
Mol Nutr Food Res; 2010 Feb; 54(2):186-94. PubMed ID: 20024931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Comparison of MC4PC and MDL-QSAR rodent carcinogenicity predictions and the enhancement of predictive performance by combining QSAR models.
Contrera JF; Kruhlak NL; Matthews EJ; Benz RD
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2007 Dec; 49(3):172-82. PubMed ID: 17703860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A new highly specific method for predicting the carcinogenic potential of pharmaceuticals in rodents using enhanced MCASE QSAR-ES software.
Matthews EJ; Contrera JF
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1998 Dec; 28(3):242-64. PubMed ID: 10049796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Comparative analysis of predictive models for nongenotoxic hepatocarcinogenicity using both toxicogenomics and quantitative structure-activity relationships.
Liu Z; Kelly R; Fang H; Ding D; Tong W
Chem Res Toxicol; 2011 Jul; 24(7):1062-70. PubMed ID: 21627106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens I. Sensitivity, specificity and relative predictivity.
Kirkland D; Aardema M; Henderson L; Müller L
Mutat Res; 2005 Jul; 584(1-2):1-256. PubMed ID: 15979392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Predicting the carcinogenic potential of pharmaceuticals in rodents using molecular structural similarity and E-state indices.
Contrera JF; Matthews EJ; Daniel Benz R
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2003 Dec; 38(3):243-59. PubMed ID: 14623477
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. In silico toxicology for the pharmaceutical sciences.
Valerio LG
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2009 Dec; 241(3):356-70. PubMed ID: 19716836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Quantitative structure-activity relationship modelling of the carcinogenic risk of nitroso compounds using regression analysis and the TOPS-MODE approach.
Helguera AM; Pérez-Machado G; Cordeiro MN; Combes RD
SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2010 Apr; 21(3-4):277-304. PubMed ID: 20544552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Computer-aided rodent carcinogenicity prediction.
Lagunin AA; Dearden JC; Filimonov DA; Poroikov VV
Mutat Res; 2005 Oct; 586(2):138-46. PubMed ID: 16112600
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Predictive models for carcinogenicity and mutagenicity: frameworks, state-of-the-art, and perspectives.
Benfenati E; Benigni R; Demarini DM; Helma C; Kirkland D; Martin TM; Mazzatorta P; Ouédraogo-Arras G; Richard AM; Schilter B; Schoonen WG; Snyder RD; Yang C
J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev; 2009 Apr; 27(2):57-90. PubMed ID: 19412856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Estimating the safe starting dose in phase I clinical trials and no observed effect level based on QSAR modeling of the human maximum recommended daily dose.
Contrera JF; Matthews EJ; Kruhlak NL; Benz RD
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2004 Dec; 40(3):185-206. PubMed ID: 15546675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. In silico screening of chemicals for bacterial mutagenicity using electrotopological E-state indices and MDL QSAR software.
Contrera JF; Matthews EJ; Kruhlak NL; Benz RD
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Dec; 43(3):313-23. PubMed ID: 16242226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Improved in silico prediction of carcinogenic potency (TD50) and the risk specific dose (RSD) adjusted Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) for genotoxic chemicals and pharmaceutical impurities.
Contrera JF
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2011 Feb; 59(1):133-41. PubMed ID: 20933038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. First report on development of quantitative interspecies structure-carcinogenicity relationship models and exploring discriminatory features for rodent carcinogenicity of diverse organic chemicals using OECD guidelines.
Kar S; Roy K
Chemosphere; 2012 Apr; 87(4):339-55. PubMed ID: 22225702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. An analysis of genetic toxicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity, and carcinogenicity data: II. Identification of genotoxicants, reprotoxicants, and carcinogens using in silico methods.
Matthews EJ; Kruhlak NL; Cimino MC; Benz RD; Contrera JF
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2006 Mar; 44(2):97-110. PubMed ID: 16352383
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. FDA toxicity databases and real-time data entry.
Arvidson KB
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2008 Nov; 233(1):17-9. PubMed ID: 18656494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Quantitative structure-carcinogenicity relationship for detecting structural alerts in nitroso compounds: species, rat; sex, female; route of administration, gavage.
Morales Helguera A; Pérez González M; Dias Soeiro Cordeiro MN; Cabrera Pérez MA
Chem Res Toxicol; 2008 Mar; 21(3):633-42. PubMed ID: 18293904
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
