208 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20194420)
1. Structural analysis and predictive value of the rodent in vivo micronucleus assay results.
Benigni R; Bossa C; Worth A
Mutagenesis; 2010 Jul; 25(4):335-41. PubMed ID: 20194420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The new ISSMIC database on in vivo micronucleus and its role in assessing genotoxicity testing strategies.
Benigni R; Bossa C; Tcheremenskaia O; Battistelli CL; Crettaz P
Mutagenesis; 2012 Jan; 27(1):87-92. PubMed ID: 21965461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A core in vitro genotoxicity battery comprising the Ames test plus the in vitro micronucleus test is sufficient to detect rodent carcinogens and in vivo genotoxins.
Kirkland D; Reeve L; Gatehouse D; Vanparys P
Mutat Res; 2011 Mar; 721(1):27-73. PubMed ID: 21238603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Evaluation of the ability of a battery of three in vitro genotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens III. Appropriate follow-up testing in vivo.
Kirkland D; Speit G
Mutat Res; 2008 Jul; 654(2):114-32. PubMed ID: 18585956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Investigating the relationship between in vitro-in vivo genotoxicity: derivation of mechanistic QSAR models for in vivo liver genotoxicity and in vivo bone marrow micronucleus formation which encompass metabolism.
Mekenyan OG; Petkov PI; Kotov SV; Stoeva S; Kamenska VB; Dimitrov SD; Honma M; Hayashi M; Benigni R; Donner EM; Patlewicz G
Chem Res Toxicol; 2012 Feb; 25(2):277-96. PubMed ID: 22196229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The high production volume chemical challenge program: the relevance of the in vivo micronucleus assay.
Rosenkranz HS; Cunningham AR
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2000 Apr; 31(2 Pt 1):182-9. PubMed ID: 10854124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Genetic toxicity assessment: employing the best science for human safety evaluation part III: the comet assay as an alternative to in vitro clastogenicity tests for early drug candidate selection.
Witte I; Plappert U; de Wall H; Hartmann A
Toxicol Sci; 2007 May; 97(1):21-6. PubMed ID: 17204584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Prediction of rodent carcinogenicity utilizing a battery of in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity tests.
Kim BS; Margolin BH
Environ Mol Mutagen; 1999; 34(4):297-304. PubMed ID: 10618179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Testing strategies in mutagenicity and genetic toxicology: an appraisal of the guidelines of the European Scientific Committee for Cosmetics and Non-Food Products for the evaluation of hair dyes.
Kirkland DJ; Henderson L; Marzin D; Müller L; Parry JM; Speit G; Tweats DJ; Williams GM
Mutat Res; 2005 Dec; 588(2):88-105. PubMed ID: 16326131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Identification of rodent carcinogens and noncarcinogens using genetic toxicity tests: premises, promises, and performance.
Zeiger E
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 1998 Oct; 28(2):85-95. PubMed ID: 9927558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Evaluation of in vivo genotoxicity of chemicals--development and application of rodent micronucleus assay].
Hayashi M; Honma M
Kokuritsu Iyakuhin Shokuhin Eisei Kenkyusho Hokoku; 2007; (125):17-34. PubMed ID: 18220044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Performance of comet and micronucleus assays in metabolic competent HepaRG cells to predict in vivo genotoxicity.
Le Hégarat L; Mourot A; Huet S; Vasseur L; Camus S; Chesné C; Fessard V
Toxicol Sci; 2014 Apr; 138(2):300-9. PubMed ID: 24431211
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Cytogenetic evaluation for genotoxicity of bisphenol-A in bone marrow cells of Swiss albino mice.
Naik P; Vijayalaxmi KK
Mutat Res; 2009 May; 676(1-2):106-12. PubMed ID: 19393337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
