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 *

108 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1855628)

  • 1. Refinement of long-term toxicity and carcinogenesis studies.
    Roe FJ
    Fundam Appl Toxicol; 1991 Apr; 16(3):616-8. PubMed ID: 1855628
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Precedents or possibilities: which should guide the harmonization of mutagenicity test protocols and carcinogen prediction strategies?
    Ashby J
    Mutat Res; 1993 Feb; 298(4):291-5. PubMed ID: 7678166
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Refinement of long-term toxicity and carcinogenesis studies.
    Rao GN; Huff J
    Fundam Appl Toxicol; 1990 Jul; 15(1):33-43. PubMed ID: 2197145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Issues in the design and interpretation of chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity studies in rodents: approaches to dose selection. Letter.
    Schafer KA; Sellers R; Barale-Thomas E
    Toxicol Pathol; 2008 Dec; 36(7):1018-9. PubMed ID: 19126796
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A prelude to debate--The utility of transgenic assays in the detection and interpretation of carcinogenic responses.
    Cebula TA; Hoffmann GR
    Environ Mol Mutagen; 2001; 37(1):85. PubMed ID: 11170245
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Accelerated rodent bioassay predictive of chemical carcinogenesis.
    Iatropoulos MJ
    Exp Toxicol Pathol; 1992 Dec; 44(8):481-7. PubMed ID: 1493367
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Regulatory Forum Opinion Piece*: Retrospective Evaluation of Doses in the 26-week Tg.rasH2 Mice Carcinogenicity Studies: Recommendation to Eliminate High Doses at Maximum Tolerated Dose in Future Studies. A Response to the Counterpoints.
    Paranjpe MG; Denton MD; Vidmar TJ; Elbekai RH
    Toxicol Pathol; 2016 Jan; 44(1):5-8. PubMed ID: 26578636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Invited commentary: predicting human pharmaceutical cancer risk.
    Leblanc B
    Vet Pathol; 2010 Jul; 47(4):599-600. PubMed ID: 20581345
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Improving carcinogenicity assessment.
    Morton D; Bourcier T; Alden CL
    Toxicol Pathol; 2013 Feb; 41(2):263-70. PubMed ID: 23076039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Rodent carcinogenicity tests need be no longer than 18 months: an analysis based on 210 chemicals in the IARC monographs.
    Davies TS; Lynch BS; Monro AM; Munro IC; Nestmann ER
    Food Chem Toxicol; 2000; 38(2-3):219-35. PubMed ID: 10717362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Data quality in predictive toxicology: reproducibility of rodent carcinogenicity experiments.
    Gottmann E; Kramer S; Pfahringer B; Helma C
    Environ Health Perspect; 2001 May; 109(5):509-14. PubMed ID: 11401763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Assessment and validation of US EPA's OncoLogic® expert system and analysis of its modulating factors for structural alerts.
    Benigni R; Bossa C; Alivernini S; Colafranceschi M
    J Environ Sci Health C Environ Carcinog Ecotoxicol Rev; 2012; 30(2):152-73. PubMed ID: 22690713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Confidence in rodent carcinogenesis bioassays.
    Ward JM; Alden CL
    Vet Pathol; 2009 Sep; 46(5):790-1. PubMed ID: 19429982
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. International Conference on Harmonisation: guidance on testing for carcinogenicity of pharmaceuticals. Notice. Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
    Fed Regist; 1998 Feb; 63(35):8983-6. PubMed ID: 12269370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Researchers exploring faster alternatives to 2-year test for carcinogenicity.
    Schmidt C
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2006 Feb; 98(4):228-30. PubMed ID: 16478737
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Fat rats and carcinogenesis screening.
    Festing MF
    Nature; 1997 Jul; 388(6640):321-2. PubMed ID: 9237745
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Regulatory Forum.
    Peden WM
    Toxicol Pathol; 2016 Dec; 44(8):1069-1071. PubMed ID: 27753636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An industrial and UK perspective on short-term testing.
    Gatehouse DG
    Prog Clin Biol Res; 1990; 340D():249-59. PubMed ID: 2371298
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Ability of short-term tests to predict carcinogenesis in rodents.
    Mason JM; Langenbach R; Shelby MD; Zeiger E; Tennant RW
    Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol; 1990; 30():149-68. PubMed ID: 2188566
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The in vivo rodent test systems for assessment of carcinogenic potential.
    van der Laan JW; Spindler P
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2002 Feb; 35(1):122-5. PubMed ID: 11846641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.