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.
266 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21381395)
1. [Perspective of predictive toxicity assessment of in vivo repeated dose toxicity using structural activity relationship]. Ono A Kokuritsu Iyakuhin Shokuhin Eisei Kenkyusho Hokoku; 2010; (128):44-9. PubMed ID: 21381395 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Alternative methods to safety studies in experimental animals: role in the risk assessment of chemicals under the new European Chemicals Legislation (REACH). Lilienblum W; Dekant W; Foth H; Gebel T; Hengstler JG; Kahl R; Kramer PJ; Schweinfurth H; Wollin KM Arch Toxicol; 2008 Apr; 82(4):211-36. PubMed ID: 18322675 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Integrated approach to assess the domain of applicability of some commercial (Q)SAR models. Kulkarni SA; Zhu J SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2008; 19(1-2):39-54. PubMed ID: 18311633 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Use of computer-assisted prediction of toxic effects of chemical substances. Simon-Hettich B; Rothfuss A; Steger-Hartmann T Toxicology; 2006 Jul; 224(1-2):156-62. PubMed ID: 16707203 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Researches on the in silico prediction of structure-activity relationship in the regulatory science sectors]. Hirose A Kokuritsu Iyakuhin Shokuhin Eisei Kenkyusho Hokoku; 2010; (128):27-8. PubMed ID: 21381391 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. On the number of EINECS compounds that can be covered by (Q)SAR models for acute toxicity. Zvinavashe E; Murk AJ; Rietjens IM Toxicol Lett; 2009 Jan; 184(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 19041378 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. An overall strategy for the testing of chemicals for human hazard and risk assessment under the EU REACH system. Combes R; Barratt M; Balls M Altern Lab Anim; 2006 Mar; 34 Suppl 1():15-27. PubMed ID: 16555957 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Using chemical categories to fill data gaps in hazard assessment. van Leeuwen K; Schultz TW; Henry T; Diderich B; Veith GD SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2009; 20(3-4):207-20. PubMed ID: 19544189 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparative analysis of predictive models for nongenotoxic hepatocarcinogenicity using both toxicogenomics and quantitative structure-activity relationships. Liu Z; Kelly R; Fang H; Ding D; Tong W Chem Res Toxicol; 2011 Jul; 24(7):1062-70. PubMed ID: 21627106 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Toxicological comments to the discussion about REACH. Greim H; Arand M; Autrup H; Bolt HM; Bridges J; Dybing E; Glomot R; Foa V; Schulte-Hermann R Arch Toxicol; 2006 Mar; 80(3):121-4. PubMed ID: 16411136 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Use of the dog as non-rodent test species in the safety testing schedule associated with the registration of crop and plant protection products (pesticides): present status. Box RJ; Spielmann H Arch Toxicol; 2005 Nov; 79(11):615-26. PubMed ID: 15940470 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Structure alerts for carcinogenicity, and the Salmonella assay system: a novel insight through the chemical relational databases technology. Benigni R; Bossa C Mutat Res; 2008; 659(3):248-61. PubMed ID: 18621573 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The role of the European centre for the validation of alternative methods (ECVAM) in the validation of (Q)SARs. Worth AP; Hartung T; Van Leeuwen CJ SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2004; 15(5-6):345-58. PubMed ID: 15669694 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. An alternative approach for the safety evaluation of new and existing chemicals, an exercise in integrated testing. Gubbels-van Hal WM; Blaauboer BJ; Barentsen HM; Hoitink MA; Meerts IA; van der Hoeven JC Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2005 Aug; 42(3):284-95. PubMed ID: 15979772 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Promises and pitfalls of quantitative structure-activity relationship approaches for predicting metabolism and toxicity. Zvinavashe E; Murk AJ; Rietjens IM Chem Res Toxicol; 2008 Dec; 21(12):2229-36. PubMed ID: 19548346 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Modeling exposure to persistent chemicals in hazard and risk assessment. Cowan-Ellsberry CE; McLachlan MS; Arnot JA; Macleod M; McKone TE; Wania F Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2009 Oct; 5(4):662-79. PubMed ID: 19552503 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The role of the European Chemicals Bureau in promoting the regulatory use of (Q)SAR methods. Worth AP; Bassan A; De Bruijn J; Gallegos Saliner A; Netzeva T; Patlewicz G; Pavan M; Tsakovska I; Eisenreich S SAR QSAR Environ Res; 2007; 18(1-2):111-25. PubMed ID: 17365963 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Strengths and limitations of using repeat-dose toxicity studies to predict effects on fertility. Dent MP Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2007 Aug; 48(3):241-58. PubMed ID: 17512650 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]