429 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19500632)
1. Assessment of the genotoxic and carcinogenic risks of p-nitrophenol when it is present as an impurity in a drug product.
Eichenbaum G; Johnson M; Kirkland D; O'Neill P; Stellar S; Bielawne J; DeWire R; Areia D; Bryant S; Weiner S; Desai-Krieger D; Guzzie-Peck P; Evans DC; Tonelli A
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2009 Oct; 55(1):33-42. PubMed ID: 19500632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Quantitative assessment of cumulative carcinogenic risk for multiple genotoxic impurities in a new drug substance.
Bercu JP; Hoffman WP; Lee C; Ness DK
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2008 Aug; 51(3):270-7. PubMed ID: 18550240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Ethyl methanesulfonate toxicity in Viracept--a comprehensive human risk assessment based on threshold data for genotoxicity.
Müller L; Gocke E; Lavé T; Pfister T
Toxicol Lett; 2009 Nov; 190(3):317-29. PubMed ID: 19443141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. In vivo micronucleus test in mice with 1-phenylethanol.
Engelhardt G
Arch Toxicol; 2006 Dec; 80(12):868-72. PubMed ID: 16944102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Overview of genotoxic impurities in pharmaceutical development.
Bercu JP; Dobo KL; Gocke E; McGovern TJ
Int J Toxicol; 2009; 28(6):468-78. PubMed ID: 19966139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. In vivo Comet assay on isolated kidney cells to distinguish genotoxic carcinogens from epigenetic carcinogens or cytotoxic compounds.
Nesslany F; Zennouche N; Simar-Meintières S; Talahari I; Nkili-Mboui EN; Marzin D
Mutat Res; 2007 Jun; 630(1-2):28-41. PubMed ID: 17507283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. MNT and MutaMouse studies to define the in vivo dose response relations of the genotoxicity of EMS and ENU.
Gocke E; Ballantyne M; Whitwell J; Müller L
Toxicol Lett; 2009 Nov; 190(3):286-97. PubMed ID: 19446969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. In vivo studies in the mouse to define a threshold for the genotoxicity of EMS and ENU.
Gocke E; Müller L
Mutat Res; 2009 Aug; 678(2):101-7. PubMed ID: 19376265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Literature review on the genotoxicity, reproductive toxicity, and carcinogenicity of ethyl methanesulfonate.
Gocke E; Bürgin H; Müller L; Pfister T
Toxicol Lett; 2009 Nov; 190(3):254-65. PubMed ID: 19857796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of carcinogenic and in vivo genotoxic potency estimates.
Sanner T; Dybing E
Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol; 2005 Feb; 96(2):131-9. PubMed ID: 15679476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The Viracept (nelfinavir)--ethyl methanesulfonate case: a threshold risk assessment for human exposure to a genotoxic drug contamination?
Lutz WK
Toxicol Lett; 2009 Nov; 190(3):239-42. PubMed ID: 19695319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Recent developments in the risk assessment of potentially genotoxic impurities in pharmaceutical drug substances.
Humfrey CD
Toxicol Sci; 2007 Nov; 100(1):24-8. PubMed ID: 17656486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Considerations regarding a permitted daily exposure calculation for ethyl methanesulfonate.
Müller L; Gocke E
Toxicol Lett; 2009 Nov; 190(3):330-2. PubMed ID: 19857798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Determination of compound-specific acceptable daily intakes for 11 mutagenic carcinogens used in pharmaceutical synthesis.
Ellis P; Kenyon M; Dobo K
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2013 Mar; 65(2):201-13. PubMed ID: 23228434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Approaches to the risk assessment of genotoxic carcinogens in food: a critical appraisal.
O'Brien J; Renwick AG; Constable A; Dybing E; Müller DJ; Schlatter J; Slob W; Tueting W; van Benthem J; Williams GM; Wolfreys A
Food Chem Toxicol; 2006 Oct; 44(10):1613-35. PubMed ID: 16887251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A rationale for determining, testing, and controlling specific impurities in pharmaceuticals that possess potential for genotoxicity.
Müller L; Mauthe RJ; Riley CM; Andino MM; Antonis DD; Beels C; DeGeorge J; De Knaep AG; Ellison D; Fagerland JA; Frank R; Fritschel B; Galloway S; Harpur E; Humfrey CD; Jacks AS; Jagota N; Mackinnon J; Mohan G; Ness DK; O'Donovan MR; Smith MD; Vudathala G; Yotti L
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2006 Apr; 44(3):198-211. PubMed ID: 16412543
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Failure of the standard battery of short-term tests in detecting some rodent and human genotoxic carcinogens.
Brambilla G; Martelli A
Toxicology; 2004 Mar; 196(1-2):1-19. PubMed ID: 15036752
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of potential human carcinogenicity of the synthetic monomer ethyl acrylate.
Williams GM; Iatropoulos MJ
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2009 Feb; 53(1):6-15. PubMed ID: 18930102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
