405 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1821372)
1. Are genotoxic carcinogens more potent than nongenotoxic carcinogens?
Parodi S; Malacarne D; Romano P; Taningher M
Environ Health Perspect; 1991 Nov; 95():199-204. PubMed ID: 1821372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The comet assay with multiple mouse organs: comparison of comet assay results and carcinogenicity with 208 chemicals selected from the IARC monographs and U.S. NTP Carcinogenicity Database.
Sasaki YF; Sekihashi K; Izumiyama F; Nishidate E; Saga A; Ishida K; Tsuda S
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2000 Nov; 30(6):629-799. PubMed ID: 11145306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The results of assays in Drosophila as indicators of exposure to carcinogens.
Vogel EW; Graf U; Frei HJ; Nivard MM
IARC Sci Publ; 1999; (146):427-70. PubMed ID: 10353398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Mouse-specific carcinogens: an assessment of hazard and significance for validation of short-term carcinogenicity bioassays in transgenic mice.
Battershill JM; Fielder RJ
Hum Exp Toxicol; 1998 Apr; 17(4):193-205. PubMed ID: 9617631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Examples of uses of databases for quantitative and qualitative correlation studies between genotoxicity and carcinogenicity.
Parodi S; Malacarne D; Taningher M
Environ Health Perspect; 1991 Dec; 96():61-6. PubMed ID: 1820280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of the utility of the lifetime mouse bioassay in the identification of cancer hazards for humans.
Osimitz TG; Droege W; Boobis AR; Lake BG
Food Chem Toxicol; 2013 Oct; 60():550-62. PubMed ID: 23954551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The influence of chemical structure on the extent and sites of carcinogenesis for 522 rodent carcinogens and 55 different human carcinogen exposures.
Ashby J; Paton D
Mutat Res; 1993 Mar; 286(1):3-74. PubMed ID: 7678908
[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. Guidelines for the evaluation of chemicals for carcinogenicity. Committee on Carcinogenicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment.
Rep Health Soc Subj (Lond); 1991; 42():1-80. PubMed ID: 1763238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Aspects of database construction and interrogation of relevance to the accurate prediction of rodent carcinogenicity and mutagenicity.
Ashby J
Environ Health Perspect; 1991 Dec; 96():97-100. PubMed ID: 1820286
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Identification of potential biomarkers of genotoxicity and carcinogenicity in L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells by cDNA microarray analysis.
Kim JY; Kwon J; Kim JE; Koh WS; Chung MK; Yoon S; Song CW; Lee M
Environ Mol Mutagen; 2005; 45(1):80-9. PubMed ID: 15612046
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Integrated approach to testing and assessment for predicting rodent genotoxic carcinogenicity.
Petkov PI; Schultz TW; Donner EM; Honma M; Morita T; Hamada S; Wakata A; Mishima M; Maniwa J; Todorov M; Kaloyanova E; Kotov S; Mekenyan OG
J Appl Toxicol; 2016 Dec; 36(12):1536-1550. PubMed ID: 27225589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. An integrated in vitro carcinogenicity test that distinguishes between genotoxic carcinogens, non-genotoxic carcinogens, and non-carcinogens.
Chapman KE; Shah UK; Fletcher JF; Johnson GE; Doak SH; Jenkins GJS
Mutagenesis; 2024 Mar; 39(2):69-77. PubMed ID: 38301659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Anomalous nonidentity between Salmonella genotoxicants and rodent carcinogens: nongenotoxic carcinogens and genotoxic noncarcinogens.
Yoshikawa K
Environ Health Perspect; 1996 Jan; 104(1):40-6. PubMed ID: 8834860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens II. Further analysis of mammalian cell results, relative predictivity and tumour profiles.
Kirkland D; Aardema M; Müller L; Makoto H
Mutat Res; 2006 Sep; 608(1):29-42. PubMed ID: 16769241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Supplement to the Carcinogenic Potency Database (CPDB): results of animal bioassays published in the general literature in 1993 to 1994 and by the National Toxicology Program in 1995 to 1996.
Gold LS; Manley NB; Slone TH; Rohrbach L
Environ Health Perspect; 1999 Aug; 107 Suppl 4(Suppl 4):527-600. PubMed ID: 10421768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Characterizing and predicting carcinogenicity and mode of action using conventional and toxicogenomics methods.
Waters MD; Jackson M; Lea I
Mutat Res; 2010 Dec; 705(3):184-200. PubMed ID: 20399889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Consideration of both genotoxic and nongenotoxic mechanisms in predicting carcinogenic potential.
Butterworth BE
Mutat Res; 1990 Sep; 239(2):117-32. PubMed ID: 2200957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Genotoxic and carcinogenic effects of gastrointestinal drugs.
Brambilla G; Mattioli F; Martelli A
Mutagenesis; 2010 Jul; 25(4):315-26. PubMed ID: 20478972
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
