99 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21668861)
1. Historical perspective on the use of visual grading scales in evaluating skin irritation and sensitization.
Farage MA; Maibach HI; Andersen KE; Lachapelle JM; Kern P; Ryan C; Ely J; Kanti A
Contact Dermatitis; 2011 Aug; 65(2):65-75. PubMed ID: 21668861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The reliability of visual scoring of patch test reactions revisited.
Isaksson M; Möller H; Bruze M
Contact Dermatitis; 2012 Mar; 66(3):163. PubMed ID: 22320673
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Development of a sensitive test method to evaluate mechanical irritation potential on mucosal skin.
Farage MA; Meyer S; Walter D
Skin Res Technol; 2004 May; 10(2):85-95. PubMed ID: 15059175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluation of modifications of the traditional patch test in assessing the chemical irritation potential of feminine hygiene products.
Farage MA; Meyer S; Walter D
Skin Res Technol; 2004 May; 10(2):73-84. PubMed ID: 15059174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The Behind-the-Knee test: an efficient model for evaluating mechanical and chemical irritation.
Farage MA
Skin Res Technol; 2006 May; 12(2):73-82. PubMed ID: 16626379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The vulvar epithelium differs from the skin: implications for cutaneous testing to address topical vulvar exposures.
Farage M; Maibach HI
Contact Dermatitis; 2004 Oct; 51(4):201-9. PubMed ID: 15500670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparative assessment of the acute skin irritation potential of detergent formulations using a novel human 4-h patch test method.
Robinson MK; Kruszewski FH; Al-Atrash J; Blazka ME; Gingell R; Heitfeld FA; Mallon D; Snyder NK; Swanson JE; Casterton PL
Food Chem Toxicol; 2005 Dec; 43(12):1703-12. PubMed ID: 16026914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of skin susceptibility to irritancy by routine patch testing with sodium lauryl sulfate.
Löffler H; Pirker C; Aramaki J; Frosch PJ; Happle R; Effendy I
Eur J Dermatol; 2001; 11(5):416-9. PubMed ID: 11525947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Determination of skin irritation potential in the human 4-h patch test.
Basketter DA; York M; McFadden JP; Robinson MK
Contact Dermatitis; 2004 Jul; 51(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 15291823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Human scalp irritation compared to that of the arm and back.
Zhai H; Fautz R; Fuchs A; Bhandarkar S; Maibach HI
Contact Dermatitis; 2004 Oct; 51(4):196-200. PubMed ID: 15500669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Irritant contact dermatitis. Part II. Evaluation evaluation of skin irritation potential of chemicals].
Chomiczewska D; Kieć-Swierczyńska M; Krecisz B
Med Pr; 2009; 60(3):209-14. PubMed ID: 19746889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Harmonization of thresholds for primary skin irritation from results of human repeated insult patch tests and laboratory animal skin irritation tests.
Tardiff RG; Hubner RP; Graves CG
J Appl Toxicol; 2003; 23(4):279-81. PubMed ID: 12884413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Irritant contact dermatitis. Part III. Non-invasive methods to assess biophysical properties of the skin].
Chomiczewska D; Kieć-Swierczyńska M; Krecisz B
Med Pr; 2010; 61(4):457-66. PubMed ID: 20865858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Intra-individual variation of irritant threshold and relationship to transepidermal water loss measurement of skin irritation.
Smith HR; Rowson M; Basketter DA; McFadden JP
Contact Dermatitis; 2004 Jul; 51(1):26-9. PubMed ID: 15291829
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Skin irritation and sensitization: mechanisms and new approaches for risk assessment. 1. Skin irritation.
Fluhr JW; Darlenski R; Angelova-Fischer I; Tsankov N; Basketter D
Skin Pharmacol Physiol; 2008; 21(3):124-35. PubMed ID: 18523410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. In vitro irritation models and immune reactions.
Gibbs S
Skin Pharmacol Physiol; 2009; 22(2):103-13. PubMed ID: 19188758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Validity and ethics of the human 4-h patch test as an alternative method to assess acute skin irritation potential.
Robinson MK; McFadden JP; Basketter DA
Contact Dermatitis; 2001 Jul; 45(1):1-12. PubMed ID: 11422260
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Use of the cytosensor microphysiometer to predict results of a 21-day cumulative irritation patch test in humans.
Landin WE; Mun GC; Nims RW; Harbell JW
Toxicol In Vitro; 2007 Sep; 21(6):1165-73. PubMed ID: 17475442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Retrospective appraisal of the relationship between skin irritancy and contact sensitization potential.
Auton TR; Botham PA; Kimber I
J Toxicol Environ Health; 1995 Oct; 46(2):149-54. PubMed ID: 7563214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The irritant potential of n-propanol (nonanoic acid vehicle) in cumulative skin irritation: a validation study of two different human in vivo test models.
Clemmensen A; Andersen F; Petersen TK; Kalden H; Melgaard A; Andersen KE
Skin Res Technol; 2008 Aug; 14(3):277-86. PubMed ID: 19159372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
