231 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18197312)
1. Conflicting views on chemical carcinogenesis arising from the design and evaluation of rodent carcinogenicity studies.
Melnick RL; Thayer KA; Bucher JR
Environ Health Perspect; 2008 Jan; 116(1):130-5. PubMed ID: 18197312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Issues in the design and interpretation of chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity studies in rodents: approaches to dose selection.
Rhomberg LR; Baetcke K; Blancato J; Bus J; Cohen S; Conolly R; Dixit R; Doe J; Ekelman K; Fenner-Crisp P; Harvey P; Hattis D; Jacobs A; Jacobson-Kram D; Lewandowski T; Liteplo R; Pelkonen O; Rice J; Somers D; Turturro A; West W; Olin S
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2007; 37(9):729-837. PubMed ID: 17957539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. International Commission for Protection Against Environmental Mutagens and Carcinogens. ICPEMC Working Paper 1/2. A multi-factor ranking scheme for comparing the carcinogenic activity of chemicals.
Nesnow S
Mutat Res; 1990 Sep; 239(2):83-115. PubMed ID: 2385240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Hydroquinone: an evaluation of the human risks from its carcinogenic and mutagenic properties.
McGregor D
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2007; 37(10):887-914. PubMed ID: 18027166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of carcinogenicity studies of medicinal products for human use authorised via the European centralised procedure (1995-2009).
Friedrich A; Olejniczak K
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2011 Jul; 60(2):225-48. PubMed ID: 21513764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Experimental design constraints on carcinogenic potency estimates.
Rieth JP; Starr TB
J Toxicol Environ Health; 1989; 27(3):287-96. PubMed ID: 2754755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Weight of evidence analysis of the tumorigenic potential of 1,3-dichloropropene supports a threshold-based risk assessment.
Yan ZJ; Bartels M; Gollapudi B; Driver J; Himmelstein M; Gehen S; Juberg D; van Wesenbeeck I; Terry C; Rasoulpour R
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2020 Nov; 50(10):836-860. PubMed ID: 33528302
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Predicting the carcinogenicity of chemicals in humans from rodent bioassay data.
Goodman G; Wilson R
Environ Health Perspect; 1991 Aug; 94():195-218. PubMed ID: 1954931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. NTP technical report on the toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) (CAS No. 1746-01-6) in female Harlan Sprague-Dawley rats (Gavage Studies).
National Toxicology Program
Natl Toxicol Program Tech Rep Ser; 2006 Apr; (521):4-232. PubMed ID: 16835633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. An examination of the association between maximum-tolerated dose and carcinogenicity in 326 long-term studies in rats and mice.
Haseman JK; Seilkop SK
Fundam Appl Toxicol; 1992 Aug; 19(2):207-13. PubMed ID: 1516777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Bioassays of shortened duration for drugs: statistical implications.
Kodell RL; Lin KK; Thorn BT; Chen JJ
Toxicol Sci; 2000 Jun; 55(2):415-32. PubMed ID: 10828275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Expectations for transgenic rodent cancer bioassay models.
Ashby J
Toxicol Pathol; 2001; 29 Suppl():177-82. PubMed ID: 11695555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Background and framework for ILSI's collaborative evaluation program on alternative models for carcinogenicity assessment. International Life Sciences Institute.
Robinson DE; MacDonald JS
Toxicol Pathol; 2001; 29 Suppl():13-9. PubMed ID: 11695549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Assessing chemical carcinogenicity: hazard identification, classification, and risk assessment. Insight from a Toxicology Forum state-of-the-science workshop.
Felter SP; Bhat VS; Botham PA; Bussard DA; Casey W; Hayes AW; Hilton GM; Magurany KA; Sauer UG; Ohanian EV
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2021 Sep; 51(8):653-694. PubMed ID: 35239444
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The Tg rasH2 mouse in cancer hazard identification.
Morton D; Alden CL; Roth AJ; Usui T
Toxicol Pathol; 2002; 30(1):139-46. PubMed ID: 11890467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A perspective on current and future uses of alternative models for carcinogenicity testing.
Goodman JI
Toxicol Pathol; 2001; 29 Suppl():173-6. PubMed ID: 11695554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. NTP technical report on the toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of 2,2',4,4',5,5'-hexachlorobiphenyl (PCB 153) (CAS No. 35065-27-1) in female Harlan Sprague-Dawley rats (Gavage studies).
National Toxicology Program
Natl Toxicol Program Tech Rep Ser; 2006 May; (529):4-168. PubMed ID: 16835634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The syrian hamster embryo (SHE) cell transformation assay: review of the methods and results.
Mauthe RJ; Gibson DP; Bunch RT; Custer L
Toxicol Pathol; 2001; 29 Suppl():138-46. PubMed ID: 11695550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
